Allowed

Justine Jose v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2017Bail Appl./156/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail application filed by the accused facing charges of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The court granted anticipatory bail citing the inordinate delay of over five years in lodging the FIR and the submission that the allegation was false and filed with malicious intent related to the petitioner's marriage.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; petitioner released on bail after executing bond for Rs.25,000 with two sureties, surrendering passport, and refraining from influencing witnesses.

Justine Jose Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2017/10TH PHALGUNA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 156 of 2017 ()

¶6

-----------------------------CRIME NO. 3630/2016 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

JUSTINE JOSE, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. JOSE, KALLILAN HOUSE, BROTHERS LANE, THRISSUR -1.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH.

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN -680 001.

¶13

ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED

¶14

3. JIPSON JOHN, AGED 25, S/O. JOHN JOHN, NEDIYAPPILLY HOUSE, NADUVATTOM P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶15

*** ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01/03/2017 IN CRL.MA. NO.1371/2017.**

¶16

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAJJU. S. ADDL. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHAIJAN JOSEPH.

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

rs.

¶19

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶20

B.A.No. 156 of 2017

¶21

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2017

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶24

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.3630 of 2017 of

¶25

Thrissur East Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC.

¶26

The prosecution case is that on 3.7.2011 he made a false promise that he would secure a job for the first informant in a shipping company and received from him Rs.2,30,000/- out of the promised amount of Rs.3,50,000/-. But the first informant neither given the job, nor repaid the money.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the first informant and learned Public Prosecutor.

¶28

The learned counsel submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false and it is with malicious intention the complaint was filed just before his marriage. Annexure-R2(a) receipt written by the petitioner

¶29

shows that he received Rs.2,30,000/- from the first informant on 3.7.2011. The promise was to secure a job for the first informant in a

¶30

B.A.No. 156 of 2017 2

¶31

shipping company. He undertook that if the job was not secured he would repay the amount. Admittedly, the first informant was not given any job nor was he repaid the amount. But the incident took place on 3.7.2011. The first informant preferred the complaint only in November, 2016. The marriage of the petitioner was fixed to be solemnised on 22.1.2017. The inordinate delay of more than five years in preferring the complaint inclines me to grant the prayer of the petitioner.

¶32

In the result, this Bail Application is allowed.

¶33

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail after interrogation on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if he is arrested by the investigating officer in connection with this case.

¶34

ii. He shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation if he is so required by him in writing.

¶35

iii. He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses, nor shall he get himself involved in any other criminal case.

¶36

B.A.No. 156 of 2017 3

¶37

iv. He shall surrender his passport before the

¶38

lower court concerned or if he does not have one he shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of his release.

¶39

If he surrenders before the Magistrate, this order is not applicable and the learned Magistrate may pass appropriate orders.

¶40

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the lower court

¶41

concerned is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

¶42

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶43

Justine Jose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Justine Jose 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

Sooraj Vs State of Kerala

Sanal Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev Vs State of Kerala

Jijo Samuel Vs State of Kerala

Ranjith Vs State of Kerala

Neez Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala