Allowed

Abdullakutty v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Oct 2011Bail Appl./5816/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail to accused No.2 in a case involving cheque fraud and prize chit offences. Bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties after petitioner complied with previous direction to appear for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail to appear for investigation on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties for like amount.

Abdullakutty Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5816 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.200/2011 OF PERUMBADAPPU POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER (S): 2ND ACCUSED

¶7

¶8

ABDULLAKUTTY, S/O.KUNHAMMED, THAIPARAMBIL ARATTAYIL HOUSE, MARANCHERI P.O., MALAPPURAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.P.K.KHALEEMUDHEEN SRI.P.G.SURESH SMT.K.VIDYA SRI.RAJAN VISHNURAJ

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SI OF POLICE, PERUMBADAPPU, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM.

¶13

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RENJITH

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶16

B.A.No.5816 of 2011

¶17

Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.200 of 2011 of Perumbadappu Police Station, Malappuram District.

¶20

The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act.

¶21

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 10.10.2011, the following order was passed :

¶22

“3. The Crime was registered on the basis of the information given by one Narayanan Nair. He stated that one Vijayan and Abdullakutty (petitioner) approached him and induced him to invest money in

¶23

BA 5816/11

¶24

¶25

Bizarre Group of Companies. Vijayan and Abdullakutty were the promoters of the company. Believing their words, the de facto complainant took two share of `14,250/- each. The de facto complainant also arranged his relatives also to take share in the company.

¶26

Vijayan filed B.A.No.5329 of 2011 which was disposed of by the order dated 1.7.2011, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court. Vijayan was directed to appear before the investigating officer. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Vijayan surrendered before the investigating officer and he was questioned. Later he appeared before the Magistrate's Court and he was granted bail on the date on which he appeared before Court.

¶27

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 18^th and 19^th October, 2011.

¶28

Post on 24^th October, 2011.

¶29

¶30

BA 5816/11

¶31

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.200 of 2011 of Perumbadappu Police Station, till 28^th October, 2011.

¶32

The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any.

¶33

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.”

¶34

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the direction in the order dated 10.10.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner.

¶35

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 10.10.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.

¶36

There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the

¶37

BA 5816/11

¶38

¶39

petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for ` 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions :

¶40

A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶41

B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required ;

¶42

C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ;

¶43

D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail;

¶44

E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶45

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶46

above.

¶47

K.T.SANKARAN

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

csl

Abdullakutty v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdullakutty v. State of Kerala

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

Sanajayan Vs State

Sunil a.v.& Another Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh & Others Vs State

Eldo K.David Vs State of Kerala

T.P.Sajeev Vs Circle Inspector of Police

Prakash Kumar Vs State of Kerala