The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam allowed a bail application filed by Subash, accused of cheating, granting extraordinary jurisdiction bail. He must surrender by October 11, 2013, and follow reporting conditions while ensuring no tampering with evidence or witnesses.
Petitioner granted extraordinary jurisdiction bail on surrender by 11.10.2013 with conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
SATURDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/13TH ASWINA, 1935
Bail Appl..No. 6520 of 2013 ()
CRIME NO. 1320/2013 OF THENMALA POLICE STATION , KOLLAM DISTIRCT.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SUBASH,
AGED 60 YEARS, SUBASH BHAVAN, PANYILAZHIKATHU HOUSE CHERUTHANOOR, EDAMON VILLAGE, PUNALOOR, KOLLAM. KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.P.A.ISMAIL SRI.DIPU JAMES
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THENMALA POLICE STATION KOLLAM DISTRICT (PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM)
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
tss
P. BHAVADASAN, J.
B.A.No. 6520 of 2013
Dated this the 5th day of October, 2013 O R D E R
An unfortunate father-in-law found himself arrayed as an accused at the behest of his daughter-in-law after she picked up quarrel with her husband and instituted proceedings before the Family Court.
having forced her to withdraw a sum of `5,25,000/- from her account.
gone through the CD, there seems to be considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. All the officers of the bank questioned by the investigating officer
B.A.No. 6520 of 2013
2
have stated that it was the same girl, who had deposited the amount, who had withdrawn the amount also. This prima facie shows that the claim made by the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated, may be true. Any way, a deeper probe into the veracity of the allegations is not warranted at this point of time. Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the manner in which the incident has taken place etc., it is felt that this is a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioner.
B.A.No. 6520 of 2013
3
sd/(P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE)
AMV/
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of cheating under extraordinary jurisdiction.
SUBASH
STATE OF KERALA
P. BAVADASAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
