Judgment : 1. The petitioner is the accused in various crimes made mention of in the above applications, who is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467 and 471 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that after having promised job and visa to various persons, she received money and transferred the funds. 3. This Court had occasion to consider the similar allegation against the petitioner in five other crimes in which this Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, ordered CBI enquiry. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that there are several other crimes have been lodged in which the petitioner is regularly appearing without fail. Two of the complainants in these cases are in fact the persons who are questioned by the CBI and are made witnesses of their case in which charges have already been laid. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is unnecessary since the fresh materials have already been obtained by the CBI. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that the act committed by the petitioner is very serious and she does not deserve any sympathy. 7. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and having perused the records, it is felt that there is some substance in the grievance voiced by the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has involved in several other crimes in which the CBI has conducted investigation and charges have been laid. It is not disputed that the petitioner is regularly appearing before the court before which the final report has been laid. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, it is felt that this is a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioners. It is not disputed that the petitioner is regularly appearing before the court before which the final report has been laid. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, it is felt that this is a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioners. These petitions are allowed as follows: : 1) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 11.11.2013, who, after interrogation, shall produce her before the JFCM court concerned, which court, on an application for bail being moved by the petitioner shall release her on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of `15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) in each cases with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the said court. 2) The court shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts, before granting bail. 3) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 9.00 am and 10.00 am until further orders. 4) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without prior permission of the court concerned. 5) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses. 6) If the passport has not been surrendered, it shall be surrendered. 7) If any of the conditions is violated, bail granted to the petitioner shall stand cancelled and the court concerned may take such steps as are available to it in accordance with law.