IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5282 of 2009 CRIME NO.420 OF 2009 OF PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- LEELA M., W/O.KARIAT SANKARANARAYANAN, CHALAKKAL VILLAGE, CHALAKKAL DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SI OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 5282 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.420 of 2009 of Peramangalam Police Station, Thrissur District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420 and 465 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.The petitioner is a Mahila Pradhan agent. She was expected to collect amounts from the customers and deposit the same in the Post Office. While receiving payments from the customers, the Mahila Pradhan agent is expected to make entries in a card to be kept by the customers. Corresponding entry would be made in the pass book and initialled by the Post Master. The Mahila Pradhan agent is expected to return the pass book to the customers. The allegation is that the petitioner made entries of having received amounts in the cards kept by the customers and thereafter, did not B.A. NO. 5282 OF 2009 :: 2 :: deposit the amount in the Post Office. It is also alleged that she made false entries in the pass books to make it appear and to convince the customers that the amounts were deposited in the Post Office while, in fact, the amount was not deposited. The total amount involved in the case is Rs.11,17,291/-. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/