Allowed

Binu S.Varghese @ Binu Chakalayil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Aug 2016Bail Appl./5266/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a bail application filed by two accused alleged of cheating. The petitioners secured anticipatory bail since the Public Prosecutor raised no serious objections, noted no prior complaints against them, and confirmed partial repayment of funds.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on condition of executing bond with two solvent sureties and reporting to the Investigating Officer.

Binu S.Varghese @ Binu Chakalayil 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 B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/3RD BHADRA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5266 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 1831/2016 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTITTA

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

BINU S.VARGHESE @ BINU CHAKALAYIL, AGED 44 YEARS S/O C.V. SACARIAH, CHAKALAYIL HOUSE, NEDUMON MURI, EZHUMKULAM VILLAGE, ADOOR

¶9

SREEDEVI BALAKRISHNAN

¶10

AGED 53 YEARS,W/O P.K.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, KRISHNAKRIPA, NEDUMON MURI, EZHAMKULAM VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADOOR THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ENAKULAM - 682 031

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT.JASMINE V.H.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-082016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶17

- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - Bail Application No.5266 of 2016

¶18

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25^th day of August 2016

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1831 of 2016 of Adoor police station registered under Section 420

¶21

read with Section 34 I.P.C.

¶22

The allegation of the prosecution can be briefly

¶23

stated thus:- The petitioners collected an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from the de-facto complainant on two different dates viz., 10.11.2014 and 25.11.2014 on the promise that the petitioners would arrange a job for the son

¶24

of the de-facto complainant in Khadi Board. However, the job as promised, was not provided. The amount was also

¶25

BA 5266/2016

¶26

: 2 :

¶27

not returned to the de-facto complainant . The petitioners

¶28

have filed this application praying for the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶29

Heard.

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor has no serious

¶31

objection in allowing the application.

¶32

It has been submitted by the learned Public

¶33

Prosecutor that the petitioners are not involved in any other offence. It has been further submitted by the learned

¶34

Public Prosecutor that no person other than the de-facto complainant has so far come forward with any such complaint against the petitioners. It appears from the report submitted by the Investigating Officer that the petitioners repaid an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- out of the

¶35

BA 5266/2016

¶36

: 3 :

¶37

amount received by the petitioners. Considering the facts

¶38

and circumstances of the case, including the fact that the petitioners are not involved in any other offence, an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners will be justified.

¶39

In the result, this application stands allowed and the respondent is directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.1831/2016 of Adoor police station, on condition of each of the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Sub Inspector of Police, Adoor Police Station, before whom the petitioners shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in

¶40

BA 5266/2016

¶41

: 4 :

¶42

the meantime, and subject to the following further

¶43

conditions:

¶44

(i) The petitioners shall report before the

¶45

Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m.

¶46

and 11 a.m. for six months or till the filing of the final

¶47

report, whichever is earlier.

¶48

(ii) The petitioners shall not intimidate or

¶49

influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the

¶50

investigation.

¶51

(iii) The petitioners shall not get involved in any

¶52

offence while on bail.

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶55

dl/25.8..2016

¶56

// True Copy //

¶57

PA to Judge

Binu S.Varghese @ Binu Chakalayil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binu S.Varghese @ Binu Chakalayil 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

Abdulkareem Vs the State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Satheesh Vs State of Kerala

Ajayakumar @ Kuttappan Vs State of Kerala

Thahira Vs State of Kerala

Saji Vs State of Kerala