Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 2. Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.472/14 of Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta registered for the offences under Sections 419 and 420 read with 34 IPC.
3. The petitioners are husband and wife. It is alleged by the prosecution that the first petitioner introduced himself to the defacto complainant as Vigilance C.I. in the Petroleum Ministry. He promised to get him a licence for running a petrol pump and to get an LPG agency for his brother in law. Believing the words of the first petitioner, the defacto complainant allegedly paid him Rs.50 lakhs in installments. But nothing happened. Later, the second petitioner gave him a cheque for Rs.50,000/- which was encashed by him. The first petitioner executed an agreement on a stamp paper agreeing to pay back the amount to the defacto complainant and the other victim. According to the prosecution, the petitioners have thus committed the offences mentioned above.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. It is not in dispute that the F.I. statement reveals commission of the offences alleged against the first petitioner, prima facie. At the same B.A.No.2891 OF 2014 :: 2 ::
time involvement of the second petitioner in the incident is doubtful. The de facto complainant alleges that the first petitioner has executed the agreement in favour of himself and his brother in law. The fact that the first petitioner introduced himself to the de facto complainant as a public servant is more serious than the other allegations against him. I do not think it proper to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court in favour of such a person. The relief sought for by the first petitioner in this application is rejected. But the second petitioner is entitled to get an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
In the result, this Bail Application is allowed, and
1) the second petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if she is arrested by the police in connection with this case.
2) She shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation if she is so required by him in writing.
3) She shall not destroy or tamper with evidence.
4) This order is not applicable if the petitioner choose to surrender before the Magistrate concerned and in such case the learned Magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law.
The prayer of the first petitioner is rejected.
jes K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE