IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5993 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.886/2011 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.2 ---------------------------------- INDIRA DEVI.T.R, W/O.K.R.SURESHKUMAR, PALATHINKAL (HOUSE), PALIYEKKARA NORTH, THIRUVALLA P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA (DT). BY ADV. SRI.P.VINODKUMAR SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.5993 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.886 of 2011 of Thiruvalla Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 28.7.2011, the following order was passed : “3. The prosecution case is the following : The accused mortgaged their property to Canara Bank and availed a loan. The Bank filed a suit and also initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. BA 5993/2011 2 The allegation is that the accused persons sold the property to the de facto complainant suppressing the mortgage and stating that the original documents were lost. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 2nd August, 2011. 5. Post on 5th August, 2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.886 of 2011 of Thiruvalla Police Station, till 5th August, 2011. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner BA 5993/2011 3 as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 28.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 28.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her executing bond for ` 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions : A) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required ; B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ; BA 5993/2011 4 C) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; D) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl