IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3243 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.247/2010 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION) ........................................ PETITIONERS(S): -------------------------- T.V.BHASKARAN,S/O.CHATHU,SAGAR HOUSE, PALLIKKAL(PO),KONDOTTI,MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. V. TEK CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sou. K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No. 3243 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under section 406, 420, 506(i) IPC. According to prosecution, first accused along with 2nd and 3rd accused went to a bank and obtained a loan for purchase of a car in the name of first accused. After obtaining the loan, car was not registered any where in Kerala and hypothecation also was not noted in the certificate. The amount was not paid. It is also alleged that petitioner and other accused criminally intimidated representatives of the bank. The offences are committed in furtherance of common intention. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is the 3rd accused. He is aged 72 years and he is the father of first accused, who is working abroad. Petitioner has not committed any offence. He is also not a party to the loan agreement. Petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor B.A. No.3243/10 2 submitted that police was making serious effort to trace out the car and it was found near the house of first accused. Car is not registered any where in Kerala. Investigation is in progress and it is at the initial stage. Petitioner's involvement has to be found out in detailed investigation. If at this stage, bail is granted, it will adversely affect the investigation. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner are not sufficient to grant anticipatory bail. However, I make it clear that consideration for bail and anticipatory bail are different. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.