Dismissed

K.P.Muhammed Jaseel v. State- Rep. by Ci of Police

Kerala HC6 Feb 2018Bail Appl./483/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a bail application filed by an accused person involved in misappropriation and forgery at a cooperative bank. The court refused bail due to the serious nature of allegations, the large amount involved, and the risk that the accused might flee after having used a forged passport to leave India.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed. The court directed the case to be disposed within six months.

K.P.Muhammed Jaseel Vs State- Rep. by Ci of Police — Corruption | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 17TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 483 of 2018

¶6

CC 12/2016 of COURT OF ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, THALASSERY CRIME NO. 1015/2013 OF VALAPPATANAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1

¶8

K.P.MUHAMMED JASEEL

¶9

AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.K.V.IBRAHIM, JEMS, NEAR MAX NURSERY GARDEN.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH SRI.K.J.JOSEPH (ERNAKULAM) SRI.V.JOHN THOMAS SMT.P.V.DENCY

¶11

SMT.V.T.LISSY

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶13

STATE- REP. BY CI OF POLICE VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.1015/2013 OF VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶14

BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR VACB SRI. A. RAJESH

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-022018 ALONG WITH B.A. NOS. 484 AND 485 OF 2018 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶17

Bail Application Nos. 483, 484 and 485 of 2018

¶18

Dated this the 6th day of February, 2018

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶21

The above cases arose out of Crime No. 1015 of 2013 of Valapattanam Police Station registered for offences under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13 (1)(d) read with Sec. 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act ("the P.C. Act" for short ) and Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477(A), 109, 201,118 and 120 (B) of IPC.

¶22

The prosecution case is that the petitioner while working as Manager in-charge of Valapattanam Service

¶23

-2-

¶24

Bail Application Nos. 483, 484 and 485 of 2018

¶25

Co.operative Bank, Manna Branch, hatched criminal conspiracy with the other accused and dishonestly misappropriated a sum of Rs. 4,12,58000.43 by committing forgery and falsification of the accounts. It is alleged that the petitioner, as a public servant, misused his official position and committed misappropriation within the purview of Sections 13(1)(c) and 13 (1)(d) read with Sec. 13 (2) of the P.C. Act. C.C. No. 173/2016, 175/2016 & C.C. No. 12 of 2016 relate to misappropriation in different periods.

¶26

The petitioner was arrested on 13-09-2017 and ever since he has been in judicial custody.

¶27

Heard .

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the application. It has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner left India after

¶29

-3-

¶30

Bail Application Nos. 483, 484 and 485 of 2018

¶31

committing the offence using a forged passport. The petitioner was retained by Malasian Police on his way to Syria. The final report has been already filed in all these cases and the cases are now ripe for trial. The allegation raised against the petitioners are very serious in nature. The amount involved is also huge.

¶32

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of the petitioner fleeing from the clutches of law cannot be sad to be unfounded.

¶33

In the said circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶34

In the result, these bail applications stand dismissed. However, the court below is directed to dispose of the above cases as expeditiously as possible and at any rate

¶35

-4-

¶36

Bail Application Nos. 483, 484 and 485 of 2018

¶37

within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I further make it clear that if at least one of the cases is not disposed of within six months as directed above, the petitioner shall be at liberty to apply for regular bail before the court below.

¶38

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶39

ani/

K.P.Muhammed Jaseel v. State- Rep. by Ci of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.P.Muhammed Jaseel v. State- Rep. by Ci of Police

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

Devi v Thattil Vs C D Mathai

Sulaiman Vs State of Kerala

Prabhakaran Vs State of Kerala

K.Padmakumar Vs K.Ellangovan I.A.S

Muhammedkutty A.C Vs State of Kerala

T.N.Gopalakrishnan Vs State of Kerala