High Court Kerala High Court

Shiny @ Shylaja vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2008

Kerala High Court
Shiny @ Shylaja vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 1883 of 2008()


1. SHINY @ SHYLAJA,D/O.CHANDRAN PILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :26/03/2008

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J
                       ------------------------------------
                        B.A.No.1883 of 2008
                       -------------------------------------
              Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008

                                   ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner, a woman, faces

allegations as the 3rd accused in a crime registered under Section

420 I.P.C. The 1st accused is allegedly the husband of the

petitioner. The petitioner stoutly denies the said assertion of her

marital status. The crux of the allegations is that the defacto

complainant was induced to part with an amount of Rs.80,000/-

on the promise of a visa for employment abroad. Visa was not

made available. Amount was not returned. The 1st accused runs

the establishment. The petitioner, allegedly the wife of the 1st

accused, was also available in the business premises, it is alleged.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays, the

learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I

am satisfied that the petitioner can now be granted anticipatory

bail. The 1st accused has not been arrested, submits the learned

Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor clarifies that the

concession that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail

may not be reckoned as having any reflection on the claim of the

1st accused for bail or anticipatory bail.

B.A.No.1883 of 2008 2

3. I am satisfied in the facts and circumstances of the

case that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to

appropriate terms and conditions. In the absence of opposition, it

is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail in

this order.

4. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The

following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned

Magistrate at 11 a.m on 02.04.2008. She shall be enlarged on

regular bail on her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees

Twenty Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the

like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;

ii) The petitioner shall make herself available for

interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and

3 p.m on 03.04.2008 and thereafter on all Mondays for a period of

one month between 10 a.m and 3 p.m. Subsequently the

petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation before the

Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating

Officer in writing to do so;

iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned

Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall

B.A.No.1883 of 2008 3

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to

arrest the petitioner and deal with her in accordance with law as if

those directions were not issued at all;

iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to her surrender on

02.04.08 as directed in clause (1) above, she shall be released

from custody on her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees

Twenty Five thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to

appear before the learned Magistrate on 02.04.08.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-