Sherin Samuel, vs State Of Kerala

This petition is filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused in Crime No.102 of 2018 of the Edathua Police Station registered under sections 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 10 of the Emigration Act, 1983.

The 1st accused is the husband of the petitioner herein. The accused Nos. 1 and 2 along with the accused Nos. 3 and 4 in furtherance of their common intention are alleged to have induced the de facto complainant and his son to part with a sum of ₹Rs.85,000/- by assuring them that the sun would be provided with an employment at Quatar. The 3rd accused was presented as a licensed recruitment agent. The amount was transferred to the account of the petitioner herein in two instalments. On the failure of the accused to arrange the assured employment or to repay the amount, the law was set in motion.

The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is twofold. According to the learned counsel, the transaction was entirely between the accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 and the de facto complainant. The petitioner herein, being the wife of the 1st accused, was implicated only because the 1st accused had persuaded the de facto complainant to deposit the amount in her account. According to the learned counsel, the 1st and 3rd accused were arrested on 22.1.2018 and substantial part of the investigation is over. The petitioner's account was being substantially operated by her husband. Referring to the FI statement, it is submitted that an agreement was entered into with the de facto complainant and the same was signed by accused Nos. 1 and 3. It is further submitted that petitioner herein is not a person with criminal antecedents.

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor who opposed the prayer. It is submitted that it is futile to contend that the petitioner is innocent . The amount was deposited in her account and the de facto complainant has specifically stated that the petitioner was with her husband when the assurances were made.

I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary. It appears that an agreement was entered into and the same was signed by accused Nos. 1 and 3. They have been arrested and, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessitous for an effective investigation.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the investigationg officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if she is proposed to be arrested, she shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions.

i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

iii) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.