IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 7386 of 2008()
1. C.P.SHOBANA, AGED 38 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. VELAYUDHAN @ MANI, AGED 42 YEARS,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :30/01/2009
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J.
----------------------------------
B.A. No.7386 OF 2008
----------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2009
O R D E R
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 465, 468, 409,
420 read with 34 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, first
petitioner was working in a financial institution and she, in
furtherance of common intention with her husband,
misappropriated the funds of the institution and thereby
caused loss to the institution and also cheated the defacto
complainant.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that
petitioners are absolutely innocent of the allegations made.
The money dealings are done by the Manager of the institution
and first petitioner has no role in the same. She is only an
employee in the institution and she is not quite educated. The
petitioner’s husband has nothing to do with the institution, it is
submitted.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the
compliant as a whole contains vague allegations of
B.A.No.7386 of 2008
2
misappropriation etc. But there is an allegation regarding
Rs.3Lakhs being advanced to one Anwar by first petitioner
without the permission of the institution and in respect of the
same, first accused has given a latter to the Company
admitting it. Second petitioner has nothing to do with the
Company, it is submitted.
On hearing both sides, considering the nature of
allegations made against first petitioner, I am not inclined to
grant anticipatory bail to her. But, as far as second accused is
concerned, there are no sufficient materials in the case diary
and therefore, he can be granted anticipatory bail. But, first
petitioner is at liberty to raise all contentions before the trial
court, if any bail application is filed under Section 437 Cr.P.C.
and it shall be disposed of on merit considering all the
contentions raised by her, in accordance with law. It is made
clear that the considerations for an anticipatory bail
application and an application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. are
different.
In the result, the following order is passed.
1. The prayer for anticipatory bail by first
B.A.No.7386 of 2008
3
accused is rejected. She shall surrender
before the Magistrate court concerned or the
Investigating Officer and co-operate with the
investigation without any delay.
2. Second accused shall surrender before the
Magistrate court concerned within seven days
from today and he shall be released on bail on
his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two
solvent sureties each for like sum to the
satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the
following conditions :
i) He shall report before the Investigating
Officer as and when directed.
ii) He shall not commit any offence while
on bail.
The petition is partly allowed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE
pac