ORDER

Dated this the 17th day of September, 2021 One fine morning the Bar Association, Alappuzha received an anonymous letter alleging that the petitioner, a lady who is not a graduate in law and not enrolled as an Advocate before the Bar Council of Kerala, is practising in the Courts in the District. Then the Bar Association without delay decided in setting the law into motion by lodging a complaint. Pursuant to the complaint forwarded by the Bar Association, Alappuzha, Crime No. 474 of 2021 has been registered by the North Police Station, Alappuzha against the petitioner for having committed offences punishable under Sections 417, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Apprehending arrest in connection with the said crime, the petitioner has approached this Court with this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The prosecution case in a nutshell are as follows:

The petitioner is a native of Alappuzha. She was practising as a Lawyer in various courts at Alappuzha for the last two and a half years with the enrolment number of another Advocate. She fraudulently approached the Bar Association, Alappuzha with enrolment number K/1177/2018, which belongs to an advocate of Thrivanathapuram and secured membership. She was regularly appearing before the various courts in Alappuzha District. She had also submitted applications before the civil courts and thus her name was also included in the panel of Commissioners and was appointed as Commissioner in so many cases. She has also appeared before the Sessions courts in certain sessions cases for the accused as State brief. Thus, she was actively and smoothly practising the profession as an Advocate attached to the Bar Association Alappuzha even without a law degree. After her admission as a member, she had contested the election of the Bar Association and was elected as an office bearer of the Association. On receipt of the anonymous letter, the association cross checked matter with the Bar Council of Kerala and then it was realized that the enrolment number used by the petitioner actually belongs to an Advocate of Thiruvananthapuram District and this petitioner had never enroled as an Advocate before the Bar Council of Kerala. So, immediately an Executive Committee meeting was convened and an opportunity was given to her to offer her explanation by issuing a notice. Though the notice was served on her, there was no response. Thereafter, the Secretary of Bar Association had given the First Information Statement before the police. Pursuant to the same this crime has been registered against her before the Alappuzha North Police Station.

3. Heard Adv. Roy Chacko, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Adv. B. Pramod, the learned counsel for the additional 3rd respondent and Smt. Sreeja V, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

4. It is significant to note that the petitioner has put in black and white that she is not a law graduate. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as she lost some papers in the examination she did not complete her LL.B course and due to her poor financial circumstances at home she could not successfully complete her course. Then, she joined as a law Intern in the office of an Advocate at Alappuzha and attended courts regularly at Ramangiri and Alappuzha, but that was without wearing the attire of an Advocate. Later due to the compulsion of certain friends in the Bar Association at Alappuzha, she submitted nomination to contest the election of the Bar Association for the year 2020-2021.

Though, she has not been admitted as a member of the Bar Association, her nomination was accepted and she won the election. In fact, she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. No offence is attracted so as to have her custody by the police to proceed with the investigation of the case, is the argument advanced on behalf of her.

5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the a