Bail application filed by the third accused in a money laundering and cheating case. The petitioner alleged fraud by previous directors. The single judge, noting preliminary evidence of fraud and resignation, allowed bail.
Petitioner released on bail on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to 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 K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/28TH JYAISHTA, 1936
Bail Appl..No. 4526 of 2014 ()
CRIME NO. 354/2014 OF BALUSSERY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED:
---------------------------------------
VETTAKKARANKANDI SREEKANTH, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, SREENILAYAM, NANMANDA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673613.
BY ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN
RESPONDENT/INVESTIGATING OFFICER:
-----------------------------------------------------------
SUB INSPECTOR, BALUSSERY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKKAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BP
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.
B.A.No.4526 of 2014
Dated this the 18th day of June, 2014
ORDER
The petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.354 of 2014 of Balussery Police Station, Kozhkode, which has been registered for the offences under Sections 120B and 420 IPC, Section 17 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act and Section 4 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982. The petitioner was one of the directors of the chit Company. The de facto complainant lodged with the police a complaint alleging that accused 1 and 2 committed the offences under section 120B and 420 IPC, Section 17 of the Money Lenders Act and Section 4 of the Chit Funds Act. Later the police made the petitioner also an accused in the case because he happened to be a director of the Company. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the 1st and 2nd accused made him a director of the Company by committing fraud upon him and when he discovered the illegal business of 1st and 2nd accused he resigned as a director and reported the illegal business to the Registrar of Companies. According to him, he has been arrayed as an accused without any foundation.
B.A.No.4526 of 2014 2
accused, who is the wife of the 1st accused. The de facto complainant informed the police on 17.5.2014 that the 1st and 2nd accused committed the offences mentioned above and he has been cheated. In the statement it is specifically alleged that the petitioner also was a victim of the illegal activities of the 1st and 2nd accused. But he also has been made an accused by the police. Annexure-A4 shows that about three months before the registration of the case the petitioner resigned as a director. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner informed the Registrar of Companies about the illegal business conducted by the 1st and 2nd accused appears to be true. Annexure-A5 is a copy of the letter received by the petitioner from the Registrar of Companies. It appears that there may be some truth in the allegation of the petitioner. The correctness of his allegation can be ascertained only in a detailed investigation. But in view of the facts disclosed above I am inclined to grant his prayer.
a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if he is arrested by the Police in connection with this case.
b) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation if he is so required by him in writing.
B.A.No.4526 of 2014 3
bail.
surrender before the Magistrate concerned and in such case the learned Magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law.
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE
cms
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the third accused who claims to have been tricked into becoming a director of a chit company.
Whether the petitioner's resignation and report to the Registrar of Companies negates his criminal liability in the bail stage.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Vettakkarakandi Sreekanth
The State
K.Abraham Mathew
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
