IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5039 of 2009()
1. VASANTHI AGED 39 YEARS
... Petitioner
2. MR. JAYANARYANA SHETY,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY OF THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :20/10/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
B.A.No.5039 of 2009
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2009
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused
Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.149 of 2009 of Badiadka Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 406, 418 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the
court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kasaragod which
was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was
registered.
4. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: The
defacto complainant, Gandhi Smaraka Seva Kendram, is a society
registered under the Societies Registration Act. Apart from its
other activities, it is engaged in micro finance to the Self Help
Groups affiliated with the society for the upliftment of the poor.
Sreesaskthi Self Help Group was formed for helping the poor
women in the area. That group was affiliated to the complainant’s
BA 5039/2009 2
society. A sum of Rs.76,000/- was granted as loan to Sreesakthi
Self Help Group. The allegation is that without crediting that
amount in the account of Sreesakthi Self Help Group, the accused
persons had misappropriated the amounts by drawing the amount
from the Bank. In spite of the promise to credit the same in the
account of Sreesakthi Self Help Group, it was not done. It is also
alleged that in the cheque for Rs.76,000/-, signature of the
President of the Self Help Group, namely, Kanchana, was obtained
by the accused with the assurance that the amount would be
credited in the account of Sreesakthi Self Help Group. But, it was
not done.
5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations
levelled against the petitioners, I am of the view that the
petitioners are not entitled to get the discretionary relief under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If bail is granted to
the petitioners, it would adversely affect the smooth and proper
investigation of the case.
The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl