Allowed

C.M.Basheer v. State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC25 Mar 2008Bail Appl./1235/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of the first accused in a cheating case involving property fraud against a bank. Bail was granted subject to conditions regarding personal appearance, interrogation, and submitting to regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted, conditional upon appearing before Magistrate and undergoing interrogation.

C.M.Basheer Vs State of Kerala and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1235 of 2008() ----------------------------CRIME NO.101/08 OF THE PALAI POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1

¶7

¶8

C.M.BASHEER, AGED 51, S/O.MEERANNAN, CHANDUVANPARAMBIL, THIDANADUKARA, ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE, ERATTUPETTA, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY

¶10

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA POLICE STATION.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

R. BASANT, J.

¶17

B.A. No. 1235 of 2008

¶18

Dated this the 25^th day of March, 2008

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the 1^st accused. Altogether, there are 3 accused persons. They face allegations in a crime registered under Sec.420 of the IPC. The crime has been registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the Manager of the South Indian Bank Ltd. The 1^st accused was the owner of an item of property. He had allegedly sold his property to the 2^nd accused. The 2^nd accused had pledged that property with the complainant/bank and had availed a loan of Rs.20 lakhs. The 3^rd accused – the brother of the 2^nd accused, is allegedly a surety/guarantor for the said transaction. The bank in the private complaint filed alleged that accused 1 to 3 have colluded to defraud the bank. It was alleged that the 1^st accused had himself pledged his title deed

¶21

B.A. No. 1235 of 2008 -: 2 :-

¶22

before the L.I.C. to raise a loan. While that loan was pending, a document was executed in favour of the 2^nd accused and making use of the said document the complainant/bank has been defrauded. This, in short, is the allegation.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are totally false. There is no outstanding liability with the LIC at all. The de facto complainant has no specific case that any liability is outstanding to the LIC. The original title deed was handed over by the 1^st accused to the 2^nd accused when the sale deed was executed in 2004. All the necessary documents were placed before the complainant/bank and it was only thereafter that the loan was sanctioned. Repayment has not been done by the 2^nd accused and only to coerce the 2^nd accused to make payment and discharge the liability, such false allegations have been raised. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bank had approached the D.R.T. and before the D.R.T. no such allegations as now raised have ever been raised also.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor was granted time to verify whether the liability with the LIC continues and whether the original title deed of the 1^st accused is now with the LIC. It is reported that the learned Public Prosecutor is instructed that

¶25

B.A. No. 1235 of 2008 -: 3 :-

¶26

the liability with the LIC has been discharged and that transaction closed, though the officials of the LIC have not been questioned and their statements have not been recorded.

¶27

This petition was filed as early as on 20/2/08. Sufficient time has been granted to the Investigator to place all the relevant materials before the court. I am satisfied that it is not necessary to wait any longer. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner subject to appropriate conditions.

¶28

In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C:

¶29

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 1.4.08. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.

¶30

(ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. on 2.4.08 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

¶31

(iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall

¶32

B.A. No. 1235 of 2008 -: 4 :-

¶33

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all;

¶34

(iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 1.4.08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 1.4.08.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

¶37

Nan/

¶38

//true copy//

¶39

P.S. to Judge

C.M.Basheer v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.M.Basheer v. State of Kerala 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

Praveen Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Sajid &Another Vs the Sub Inspector of Police,Valapattanam

Joseph Mathew @ Tomy Vs State of Kerala

Madhu, S/O.Parameswaran Vs S.I. of Police, Manjeri Police Station

Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Ajeer Vs Station House Officer, Taliparamba Ps.