Disposed

Reji.C.Moncy v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jul 2017Bail Appl./2747/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under section 438 CrPC seeking pre-arrest bail in an alleged cheating case, the High Court dismissed the plea as the applicant failed to advance any representation and the nature of offences involving fraud against ministers did not justify anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

The plea for anticipatory bail was rejected and the application was disposed of.

Reji.C.Moncy Vs the 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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2017/22ND ASHADHA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2747 of 2017 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.MC 588/2017 of II ADDL.SESSIONS COURT,ERNAKULAM DATED 11-04-2017 CRIME NO. 537/2017 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

REJI.C.MONCY S/O.MONCY C CHINNAKKUTTY, AGED 46 YEARS, CHANDRATHIL (H), PAMPAKUDA P.O., ERNAKULAM,PIN - 686667.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.G.MANU (MAMMALASSERY) SRI.K.M.MADHU

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.R.DHANIL

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

VPS

¶15

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J

¶16

B.A. No.2747 of 2017

¶17

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2017

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This application is filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

¶20

The petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.537 of 2017 of the Hill Palace Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under section 420 of the IPC.

¶21

Though the matter was posted on numerous occasions, there is no representation for the petitioner. Apparently the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition.

¶22

The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the petitioner is involved in similar offences. It is submitted that the modus operandi of the petitioner is identical and he has defrauded several persons claiming to be the private secretary of a Minister. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, it does not appear to me that this is a fit case where the relief of prearrest bail can be granted.

¶23

BA 2747/2017

¶24

¶25

If the petitioner is so advised, he may surrender before the investigating officer, who shall interrogate him. If arrest of the petitioner is found necessary, the investigating officer shall thereafter produce him before the jurisdictional Magistrate within the statutory period. On such production, if an application for bail is filed, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon.

¶26

This application for anticipatory bail is disposed of.

¶27

Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶28

vps 13.7.17

Reji.C.Moncy v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reji.C.Moncy v. the 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

Kunjumon S.K. @ Nasar Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Shafi Vs State of Kerala

Faizal a. Vs the State of Kerala

Vinodkumar Vs State of Kerala

Sugathan.R. Vs State of Kerala

Benny Paul P. Vs State of Kerala