Allowed

Praveen.N v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jan 2016Bail Appl./8350/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Referred bail application under Section 420 IPC regarding money lending charges and cheque misuse. Court noted allegations involved civil dispute over financial transaction terms. Held that since matter depends on nature of transaction pending in civil suits, pre-arrest bail granted subject to appearing for interrogation and not interfering with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted to accused on conditions to appear for interrogation and pay bond with sureties if arrest proposed by IO.

Praveen.N Vs State of Kerala — Money Laundering | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/15TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8350 of 2015

¶6

CRIME NO. 1349/2015 OF KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:

¶8

1. PRAVEEN.N, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.LATE K GANGADHARAN, GANGA, PAYYALLORE,

¶9

KOLLENGODE.

¶10

2. KAVITHA, AGED 38 YEARS

¶11

W/O.PRAVEEN, GANGA, PAYYALLORE,

¶12

KOLLENGODE.

¶13

3. MOHANDAS, AGED 64 YEARS S/O.V K KRISHNAN NAIR, 502, SREE SAILAM APARTMENT, P O, KANDANASSERY, CHOWALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶14

BY ADVS.SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN SMT.K.J.ANITHA

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶16

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶17

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION. KOLLENGODE P O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678103.

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶22

B.A.No.8350 of 2015

¶23

Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2016

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1349/2015 of Kollengode Police Station for offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC read with Section 17 and 18A of the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958 and the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2012.

¶26

The allegation of the de facto complainant is that the de facto complainant had a financial transaction with the petitioner for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs and several signed blank papers and signed cheques were handed over. It is alleged that they inflated the liability, filled up the blank documents and civil suits were instituted on the strength of the document.

¶27

It is further alleged that on December 2014, the accused came to the house of the de facto complainant and threatened him demanding exorbitant interest. Apprehending arrest in the above crime, the

¶28

B.A.No.8350 of 2015

¶29

¶30

petitioners seek pre arrest bail.

¶31

Heard both sides and examined the records.

¶32

Even the complaint discloses that litigations are pending between the parties. The petitioner herein

¶33

had filed civil suits for recovery of money on the basis of the promissory note and also cheques. Essentially, the question whether the accused have committed any of the offence alleged against them is a matter which depends

¶34

on the nature of financial transaction and the terms of the financial transaction.

¶35

The very same set of allegation forms the subject matter of the civil proceedings also. Evidently, whether there was an agreement between the parties or whether there was an inflation of the interest claimed are matters to be decided in the civil suit. Since the allegation against the accused have got a flavour of civil dispute also, I feel that it is fit case that pre arrest bail is granted to the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶36

(a) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from

¶37

B.A.No.8350 of 2015 3

¶38

today and shall offer themselves for interrogation. At the end of the investigation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest them, they shall be released on bail on each of the petitioner executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each.

¶39

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

¶40

The bail application is allowed.

¶41

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶42

//TRUE COPY//

¶43

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶44

Praveen.N v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen.N 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

Mayandi Vs State of Kerala

Sujith Vs State of Kerala

B.Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

Saleesh.K.Satheesh Vs State of Kerala

Bineesh Vs State of Kerala

T.Suhail Vs State of Kerala