Kerala High Court
Anju Mukesh vs State Of Kerala on 8 December, 2015
Author: A.Hariprasad
Bench: A.Hariprasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD
TUESDAY,THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937
Bail Appl..No. 7636 of 2015 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 1889/2015 OF KODUNGALLUR POLICE STATION,THRISSUR DISTRICT
------------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
----------------------------------------------
ANJU MUKESH, AGED 28 YEARS,
W/O.MUKESH, PAZHAMPALLATH HOUSE,
P.O.PANANGAD, S.N.PURAM, KODUNGALLUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.AMJAD ALI
SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE:
----------------------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
REPRESENTING THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KODUNGALLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. R.REMA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
A.HARIPRASAD, J.
------------------------------------------------
B.A.No.7636 of 2015
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2015
O R D E R
Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.1889 of 2015 of Kodungallur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 463, 464, 468, 477 and 380 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Defacto complainant is the managing director of the Mynakam General Finance Private Limited. The allegation is that this petitioner along with the first accused, while working in the above concern, created false documents and allowed spurious gold to be pledged in the concern and swindled money for more than Rs.30 lakhs.
4. Heard both sides.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. Prosecutor produced the case diary for perusal. As per order on B.A.No.5045 of 2015, first accused in the case was directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and he was directed to be produced B.A.No.7636 of 2015 2 before the court.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner also stands in the same footing.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a lady having a small child. According to him, the petitioner is innocent and she actually informed about the irregularities to the authorities.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with the following conditions:
(a) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of 'two weeks' from today and submit herself for interrogation. Thereafter, she shall be released on bail on executing a bond for `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(b) The petitioner shall appear before the B.A.No.7636 of 2015 3 Investigating Officer as and when directed for the purpose of interrogation.
(c) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
(d) The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses.
(e) The petitioner shall not in any manner interfere or meddle with the investigation.
(f) The petitioner shall not, during the period of this bail get involved in any offence.
In case any of the above conditions is violated, bail granted hereby is liable to be cancelled for which the investigating officer may move application before the jurisdictional magistrate.
Sd/-
A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
AS /True Copy/
P.A. To Judge