Allowed

K.Vijaya v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Oct 2011Bail Appl./6393/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to a widow accused of forgery and cheating related to a loan fraud. After the petitioner complied with a prior direction to meet the investigating officer, the Court allowed her bail subject to financial bonds and conditions restricting tampering with witnesses or evidence.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; anticipatory bail granted on executing bond for Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties for the like amount.

K.Vijaya Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6393 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.233/2011 OF KOZHIKODE TOWN POLICE STATION ....................

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1

¶7

¶8

K.VIJAYA, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.KANNAN, KRISHNA POST PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE, KOZHIKKODE TOWN POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶11

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶14

B.A.No.6393 of 2011

¶15

Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.233 of 2011 of Kozhikode Town Police Station.

¶18

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 466, 468, 476 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

3. The prosecution case is the following:-

¶20

A term loan for Rupees Five lakhs was availed by the first

¶21

accused from Karoor Vysya Bank for the purpose of purchasing a tempo traveller. It is alleged that the accused produced a photo copy of the registration certificate of the vehicle wherein entries were found indicating hypothecation of the vehicle to the bank. Later, when repayment was defaulted, the bank

¶22

BA 6393/11

¶23

¶24

made enquiries and it was found that the original R.C. Book does not contain endorsement regarding hypothecation and the photo copy produced before the bank was a forged document.

¶25

It is submitted that the first accused (Vijaya) is a widow. Accused No.3 (Vijayan) is her brother and accused No.2 is her father.

¶26

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 27.9.2011, the following order was passed :

¶27

“5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences, 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 03/10/2011 and 04/10/2011.

¶28

Post on 11/10/2011.

¶29

It is submitted by the learned Public

¶30

BA 6393/11

¶31

¶32

Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.233 of 2011 of Kozhikode Town Police Station, till 13/10/2011.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶36

that the direction in the order dated 27.9.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner.

¶37

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 27.9.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.

¶38

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

¶39

BA 6393/11

¶40

¶41

petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her 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 :

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

above.

K.T.SANKARAN

JUDGE

csl

K.Vijaya v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Vijaya 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

Muthuraman Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf & Others Vs State of Kerala

Sreenath S.Nair Vs State of Kerala

Sinimon Vs State of Kerala

Jayakumar K.N Vs State of Kerala

Dhanesh Vs State of Kerala