Allowed

Haris v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jan 2016Bail Appl./39/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC, the court granted bail to the accused charged with cheating and forgery offences. The grant was conditioned on furnishing a bond, periodic appearance before the Investigating Officer, and a prohibition against intimidation or repeat offenses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to execution of bond with two sureties, appearing before the Investigating Officer, and not committing further crimes.

Haris Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/21ST POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 39 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 1305/2015 OF ARANMULA POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

HARIS, S/O.KOYA, REHNA MANZIL OR VELUTHASSERY PURAYIDOM, MULLAKKAL VILLAGE, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.S.SREEJITH

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Msd.

¶15

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶16

B.A.No.39 of 2016

¶17

Dated this the 11^th day of January, 2016

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1305/2015 of Aranmula Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 419, 465, 468, 471, 201 of IPC.

¶20

The prosecution case is that the petitioner advertised in the daily newspaper with his phone number soliciting the persons who are in need of business loan, home loan, personal loan etc. He used to charge commission for rendering this services. He was arrested on 12.11.2015 and is in custody since then, he seeks bail.

¶21

Heard both sides and examined the report.

¶22

The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions

¶23

submitted that the petitioner is involved in five other cases of identical nature of different Police Station. Essentially, the modus operandi adopted by the petitioner is to publish such advertisements in newspaper soliciting clients, and to claim charges from prospective customers.

¶24

B.A.No.39 of 2016

¶25

¶26

Having regard to the fact that the investigation has substantially progressed and the duration during which he was in jail, I feel that bail can now be granted to him subject to the following conditions:

¶27

(a) He shall execute a bond for a sum of

¶28

`60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) with

¶29

two solvent sureties for the like sum to the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶30

(b) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Tuesdays between 09.00 a.m and 10.00 a.m. for a period of two months from the date of his release.

¶31

(c) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the witnesses and shall also not interfere with the course of investigation.

¶32

(d) He shall not get involved in any other crime of identical nature.

¶33

The bail application is allowed.

¶34

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶37

Haris v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haris 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

Chandrashekaran Vs State of Kerala

Lithesh Vs State of Kerala

Ratheesh Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Mala

Nikhil Chandran @ Malu Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala