IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2010 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 5712 of 2009() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.352/2009 OF VANCHIYOOR POLICE STATION. .......... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 --------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL SALAM, AGED 48 YEARS,S/O.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, S.S.ENTERPRISES,AMBIKA VILASOM ROAD, VANCHIYOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SEENATH,W/O.ABDUL SALAM, RESIDING AT THIRUVATHIRA, THIRUMALA P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.D.VIJAYAKUMAR SRI.K.C.BINU RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.352 OF 2009 OF VANCHIYOOR POLICE STATION) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.5712 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2010 O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioners are accused No.1 and 2 in the crime registered u/s 420 and 34 IPC. According to prosecution, both the accused in furtherance of common intention to cheat defacto complainant, induced him to part with Rs.25,000/- and also driving license etc. of his son to obtain visa and employment in Saudi Arabia. But visa was not arranged by petitioners and they failed to return the documents also and it was revealed that they had cheated the defacto complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter is settled between the parties and a compromise is entered into and it is produced before this court as Annexure -1. Hence anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted petitioners were laid up and hence they could not appear in court as directed and therefore, B.A. No.5712/09 2 he produced Annexure -A1 promissory note, executed by defacto complainant stating that he had no grievance. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that there was a direction from this court to appear before the investigating officer. But, petitioner failed to comply with the direction. Hence this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. Heard both sides, on going through the records I find there was a direction to the petitioner from this court to appear before the investigating officer on 8.1.2010 and convince that matter is settled. This order is not complied with. Though, first petitioner was allegedly laid up, there is no document or material to establish the same. It is submitted that the matter is now settled by virtue of annexure -A1 promissory note. Heard both sides. Annexure -A1 is cited as promissory note. It is stated therein that cheque is given for Rs.25,000/- and it is withdrawn and defacto complainant and another person will inform about this fact to the High Court as well as Magistrate court and the police station. Learned public prosecutor submits that he has no instruction regarding any settlement. Nobody has appeared and B.A. No.5712/09 3 informed this court also about any settlement, except the petitioner. In such circumstances, I cannot act upon Annexure-A1. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.