Allowed

Raveendran V.P. v. Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC29 Jan 2016Bail Appl./477/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted bail to an accused facing charges under Section 420 IPC and the Money Lenders Act. The court held that without allegations of cheating intent, custodial interrogation was not warranted, allowing bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a bond for Rs. 60,000 with two sureties on similar terms.

Raveendran V.P. Vs Sub Inspector of Police — Money Laundering | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/9TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 477 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRMC 2931/2015 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOZHIKODE

¶7

CRIME NO. 866/2015 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:-:

¶9

RAVEENDRAN V.P., AGED 55 YEARS S/O.SANKARAN, VADAKKEPUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE KOOTHALI AMSOM DESOM, KOOTHALI P.O., PERAMBRA KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE:-:

¶12

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 525.

¶13

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

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI. C.RASHEED

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

SKV

¶17

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶18

=================== B.A. No.477 of 2016

¶19

=======================

¶20

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2016

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No.866/2015 of Perambra Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 17 and 18(A) of Money Lenders Act.

¶23

According to the prosecution, Sub Inspector of Police of a local Police Station got a reliable information that the petitioner was conducting a money lending a search was conducted on 23.12.2015 at 5.45 pm, About 25 blank signed cheques of different banks and 20 blank signed papers were also recovered from a safe in the bed room of the petitioner. It is alleged that the petitioner was engaged in money lending business. A crime was registered and the police is investigating.

¶24

Essentially the allegation is under Section 420 of

¶25

the Indian Penal Code. Even according to the prosecution as on today, nobody has come forward with an allegation that

¶26

B.A. No.477 of 2016 2

¶27

the cheques were taken from them with an intention to cheat. The presence of several negotiable instruments and other documents which can be converted into other valuable documents were seized from the house of the petitioner is doubtful. He is answerable for that. The substantial part of the seizure of documents is over and the only question remains is whether he was conducting money lending as a business to attract the provisions of the money lenders Act. I feel that in the above circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not warranted and bail can be granted to the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶28

(a) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigation Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail, on he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like

¶29

B.A. No.477 of 2016 3

¶30

sum each.

¶31

(b). He shall appear before the Investigation Officer as and when called for and co-operate with the

¶32

investigation.

¶33

(c) He shall appear before the Investigation Officer on all Tuesdays between 9.00 am and 10.00 am for a period of two months from the date of execution of the bond.

¶34

(d). He shall not threaten the defacto complainant, coerce or intimidate the witnesses and shall not in any manner interfere with the investigation.

¶35

The bail application is allowed as above.

¶36

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶37

SKV

Raveendran V.P. v. Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raveendran V.P. v. Sub Inspector of Police

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

Kunjappan @ Pareeth Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Mala Police Station

Shaji K.J Vs State of Kerala

Manoj Vs State of Kerala

Benny Bernad Vs State of Kerala

Sabuji Kumar Biswas Vs State of Kerala

Sarjas Vs State of Kerala