Allowed

Vishnu K Sasi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2018Bail Appl./1093/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC allowed. Court held custodial interrogation unnecessary as allegations against petitioner were minor in nature, he had no antecedents, and there was no risk of absconding. Bail granted on bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two sureties; required to surrender passport and appear before I.O. for three Saturdays.

Vishnu K Sasi Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1093 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 426/2017 OF VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION ,KASARGOD

¶7

-------

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.6

¶9

VISHNU K SASI, S/O K.M.SASI, AGED 26 YEARS, KOLAPPILLIL HOUSE, KOOTHATTUKULAM, OLIYAPPURAM P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.SAJI.P.JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT::

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR, VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAMESH CHAND

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

TS 16.03.2018

¶16

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J.

¶17

Bail Application No.1093 of 2018

¶18

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2018

¶19

ORDER

¶20

~ ~ ~ ~

¶21

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶22

The petitioner is the sixth accused in the case registered as Crime No.426/2017 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Kasaragod under Section 420 IPC. According to the prosecution case, the accused in the case together have obtained a total amount of Rs.18,09,500/- from the de facto complainant on the promise that she would be made a partner in the firm by name “Nandana Holidays” and also on the promise that an Innova car would be purchased for the purpose of the business of the firm. But they did not make her a partner in the aforesaid business and they also did not purchase the vehicle and thereby they cheated her.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

¶24

The case against the accused has been registered

¶25

B.A.1093/18 :2:

¶26

on the basis of the complaint filed by the de facto complainant in the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kasaragod which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. On a perusal of the allegations in this complaint it is seen that the main allegations are made against the first accused, who is a close relative of the de facto complainant. As far as the petitioner is concerned, the allegation is that he received a total amount of Rs.6,50,000/- from the de facto complainant on the promise that arrangements would be made to purchase an Innova car for the business conducted by the firm “Nandana Holidays”. Considering the nature of the allegations raised against the petitioner herein, custodial interrogation of him appears to be not necessary to have an effective investigation in the case. The prosecution has also no case that the petitioner has got any criminal antecedents. There is also no apprehension on the part of the prosecution that on getting bail he would abscond and flee from justice. Considering

¶27

B.A.1093/18 :3:

¶28

these aspects, I find that the discretion of the court can be exercised in favour of the petitioner to grant him pre-arrest bail.

¶29

In the result, the petition is allowed and it is ordered as follows:

¶30

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two sureties each for the like amount in the event of his arrest by police in Crime No.426/2017 of Vidyanagar Police Station.

¶31

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 9.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on all Saturdays for a period of three months after being released on bail.

¶32

iii.The petitioner shall surrender his passport in the Magistrate's Court concerned within three days of his release on bail. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect in that court within that time.

¶33

iv. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed in writing to do so.

¶34

B.A.1093/18 :4:

¶35

v. If the petitioner violates any of the conditions of bail, the jurisdictional court is at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law without any further orders of this court.

¶36

Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE

¶37

okb.

¶38

//True copy// P.A. to Judge

Vishnu K Sasi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu K Sasi 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

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Sujin Vs State of Kerala

Aseer A.P Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vs State of Kerala

Ajin P. Shaji Vs the Station House Officer

Soji George Vs State of Kerala