Allowed

T.D.Davis and Another v. State and Another

Kerala HC25 Feb 2008Bail Appl./1009/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application petition filed by spouses accused of a loan default, the petitioner husband borrowed funds from a bank and the wife acted as a surety. The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C without opposition, directing appearance before the magistrate and interrogation by the IO within prescribed timelines and setting a monetary bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted directed appearance before Magistrate and IO within 3 days, bond execution required.

T.D.Davis and Another Vs State and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1009 of 2008() -----------------------------

¶6

CRIME NO.76/08 OF MALA POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS : ACCUSED

¶8

¶9

T.D.DAVIS , S/O. DEVASSY KUTTY,AGED 42 YEARS, GOVT. CONTRACTOR, THACHIL KANNAI HOUSE PUTHENCHIRA EAST P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

SUNITHA DAVIS, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O. T.D.DAVIS,GOVT. CONTRACTOR, THACHIL KANNAI HOUSE,PUTHENCHIRA EAST P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

¶12

RESPONDENTS: STATE & COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM KOCHI-31.

¶15

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MALA POLICE STATION, MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

B.A.No.1009 of 2008

¶19

R.BASANT, J

¶20

Dated this the 25^th day of February, 2008

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are spouses. The 1^st petitioner-husband had availed a loan from the Trichur branch of the H.D.F.C bank for purchasing a Road Roller. The 2^nd petitioner-wife was a surety/guarantor in the said loan transaction. The crime has been registered on the complaint filed by the financing bank before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate had forwarded the same to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Accordingly crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. They have not committed any offence at all. The vehicle is safe in their possession and the same is being used by the petitioners. Even assuming that there has been a default in payment of the amount, that can only give rise to an allegation of breach of civil liability and there can be no possible allegation of any culpable liability. Only to vex and

¶24

B.A.No.1009 of 2008

¶25

¶26

harass the petitioners, the defacto complainant is resorting to criminal adjudicatory process. The petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed.

¶27

The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits tat appropriate conditions may be imposed to help the investigator to expeditiously complete the investigation in the crime.

¶28

Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am persuaded to agree that directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C can be issued in favour of the petitioners. In the absence of opposition, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail in this order.

¶29

In the result, this Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶30

i) The petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 03.03.08. They shall be enlarged on regular bail on their executing bonds for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;

¶31

ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and

¶32

¶33

B.A.No.1009 of 2008

¶34

3 p.m on 04.03.08 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so;

¶35

iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all;

¶36

iv) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on 03.03.08 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 03.03.08.

¶37

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶38

rtr/-

T.D.Davis and Another v. State and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.D.Davis and Another v. State and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajimon C.D. Vs State of Kerala

Najeeb v.H.and Another Vs S.I.of Police,Ekm.Town N.Police Stn.&Anr

Solomon Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Kabeer & Another Vs State of Kerala

Ajith.R.S. Vs State of Kerala

Basheer.K. and Others Vs State of Kerala