Allowed

Jayaprakash v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jun 2014Bail Appl./2471/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed bail applications filed by an accused apprehending arrest in two crimes involving alleged money lending and cheating. The court directed the petitioner to surrender for cooperation with investigation and released him on bail with a sum of ₹25,000 and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail for ₹25,000 with two sureties, directing surrender for interrogation on June 23, 2014, and imposing conditions on money lending and witness interaction.

Jayaprakash Vs State of Kerala — Money Laundering | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/22ND JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2471 of 2014

¶6

CRIME NO. 31/2013 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION , KOLLAM

¶7

PETITIONER / ACCUSED :

¶8

JAYAPRAKASH,

¶9

NALINI NIVAS, KOONAYIL, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH PANICKER

¶11

RESPONDENTS / STATE :

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR POLICE STATION.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2014, ALONG WITH B.A.NO. 2523 OF 2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.

¶18

Bail Appl.Nos. 2471 & 2523 of 2014 ---------------------------------------Dated this the 12^th day of June, 2014

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petitioner who is the accused in Crime Nos.31 of 2013 and 2072 of 2013 respectively of the Paravoor Police Station (Kollam District), apprehends arrest and has filed these applications.

¶21

2.Crime No.31 of 2013 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 13, 17 & 18A of the Kerala Money Lender's Act. The allegation is that de facto complainant borrowed `9,00,000/- in the year 2001 and obtained sale deed executed by the de facto complainant on condition that on repayment of the amount with interest the property will be re-conveyed. But the petitioner has not re-conveyed the property.

¶22

3.Crime No.2072 of 2013 is registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 & 17 of the Kerala Money Lender's Act.

¶23

B.A.Nos. 2471 & 2523 of 2014

¶24

¶25

The de facto complainant is daughter of the de facto complainant in Crime No.31 of 2013. Allegation is that the petitioner had lent `15,000/- to the de facto complainant in the year 2003 and collected signed blank papers, copy of sale deed etc. Though, the de facto complainant paid a huge amount, the petitioner is still demanding further amount. He is trying to whisk away property belonging to the de facto complainant.

¶26

4.The learned Public Prosecutor while opposing the applications submitted that the petitioner is also being proceeded against under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. He is engaged in money lending business without authority. In Crime No.31 of 2013, blank stamp papers signed and bearing thumb impression were seized.

¶27

5.The learned counsel submitted that allegations are not true. The petitioners purchased an item of property for consideration from the de facto complainant in Crime No.31 of 2013 as per sale deed No.2875 of 2009 of the

¶28

B.A.Nos. 2471 & 2523 of 2014

¶29

¶30

SRO, Paravoor.

¶31

6.On hearing both sides, it appears custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, but he has to cooperate with the investigation.

¶32

The applications are allowed as under :

¶33

Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating the case on 23.06.2014 at about 10 am for interrogation.

¶34

In case interrogation is not completed that day, the petitioner shall appear before the officer investigating the case on any other day/days at reasonable time and place as directed by the investigating officer.

¶35

The petitioner shall co-operate with

¶36

investigation of the case.

¶37

B.A.Nos. 2471 & 2523 of 2014

¶38

¶39

In case the petitioner is arrested, he shall produced before the jurisdictional magistrate in both the cases the same day.

¶40

On such production the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) by the arresting officer on his executing bond for `25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:

¶41

a. One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶42

b. Petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required in connection with the case.

¶43

B.A.Nos. 2471 & 2523 of 2014

¶44

¶45

c. Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any of the witnesses.

¶46

d. Petitioner shall not get involved any offence during the period of this bail. e. Petitioner shall not engage in money lending business except with permission obtained from the authorities.

¶47

e. In case any of conditions Nos.(b) to (d) is violated, it is open to the investigating officer to file application before the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail granted hereby, as held in P.K.Shaji v.State of Kerala [AIR 2006 SC 100].

¶48

THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE

¶49

AMV

¶50

/TRUE COPY/

¶51

P.A.TO JUDGE

Jayaprakash v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaprakash 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharafudheen Vs State of Kerala

S.K. Jayachandran Vs State of Kerala

Faizal P. Vs State of Kerala

Bindhu.K.K. Vs State of Kerala

T v Sree Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Sanoj Vs State of Kerala