High Court Kerala High Court

Shiyala vs The State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
Shiyala vs The State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 2117 of 2008()


1. SHIYALA, PROPRIETEX, SHIYALA TRAVELS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

2. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENRAL POLICE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.C.DEVY

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :09/04/2008

 O R D E R
                           R. BASANT, J.
             -------------------------------------------------
                      B.A. No. 2117 of 2008
             -------------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 9th day of April, 2008

                                ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner – a

woman, apprehends arrest on the allegation that she has

allegedly committed non-bailable offences against one M/s Air

Travel Enterprises. Some amounts are due from her to the

said M/s Air Travel Enterprises. For the discharge of that

liability, a cheque has been issued also. The cheque has not

been presented yet. To vex and harass the petitioner, the

petitioner is being called to the Police Station frequently.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking

instructions, submits that the respondent/police have no

intention to arrest the petitioner at all. No crime is registered

against her and she is not required to be arrested. She is not

required now to attend the Police Station also, it is submitted.

B.A. No. 2117 of 2008 -: 2 :-

It is true that complaints about amounts due have been raised

before the police by the rival contestants and it was, in these

circumstances, that the petitioner was required to appear before

the police. Now the petitioner is not required to appear before

the police. There is no case against her. She will not be

arrested also, undertakes the learned Public Prosecutor

unambiguously. The S.H.O. of the Central Police Station did not

report before the learned Public Prosecutor initially and this

obliged the learned Public Prosecutor to make a report to this

Court that no instructions are being received. Hence the Officer

i.e., Mr.V.S. Navaz, the Principal Sub Inspector of Police of the

Central Police Station was directed to be present in court and it

is after discussions with him that the learned Public Prosecutor

makes these submissions/undertakings.

3. The apprehension of the petitioner is thus found to be

without any basis. If the petitioner were hereafter required to

be arrested or called to the Police Station in connection with the

present controversy, prior intimation shall be given to the

petitioner and prior permission of this Court shall be taken,

submits/undertakes the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The submissions and undertakings of the learned Public

B.A. No. 2117 of 2008 -: 3 :-

Prosecutor are accepted. I am satisfied that the apprehension of

the petitioner is, in these circumstances, without any basis.

5. This petition is accordingly dismissed as agreed.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge