Allowed

Ussainkutty Haji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Dec 2018Bail Appl./530/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail and anticipatory bail applications of the accused in a cheating case under Section 420 IPC. The committee referred parties for mediation which resulted in a settlement. The court was satisfied with the voluntary nature of the settlement and released the petitioner on bail subject to conditions regarding cooperation and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties; anticipatory bail also granted.

Ussainkutty Haji 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 SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 530 of 2018

¶5

CRIME NO. 827/2017 OF THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

USSAINKUTTY HAJI AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. MAYINKUTTY HAJI,RESIDING AT VARUVINKAYALIL HOUSE,VAVADU VILLAGE, VALIYAPARAMBU P.O,THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER SRI.M.S.AMAL DHARSAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

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

¶11

2 ADDL.R2. KOCHUMAMAN S/O.M.C.MAMAN, PUTHUPPADI P.O., MANALUKAALAYIL, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08.02.2018 IN CRL.M.A.1237/18 IN BA.NO.530/2018)

¶12

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN R1 PP AJITH MURALI

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Bail Appl..No. 530 of 2018

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The petitioner herein stands arrayed as the

¶18

accused in Crime No.827/2017 of Thamarassery police station for offences punishable under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The allegation of the defacto complainant was that the petitioner herein defrauded the defacto complainant after receiving valuable consideration stating that he is the owner of an item of property. When the matter came up, and after hearing both sides it was found that there was element of settlement, if mediation was adopted. Accordingly, parties were referred to the mediation centre with consent for mediation. The mediator has forwarded a settlement dated 20.3.2018 signed by both sides and counter signed by the respective counsels. It is submitted by both sides that parties have voluntarily entered into the settlement. After hearing both sides

¶20

¶21

Bail Appl..No. 530 of 2018

¶22

and perusing the memorandum of settlement, I am satisfied that the parties have voluntarily entered into an agreement and the terms are lawful.

¶23

Having considered these facts, I am inclined to accept the memorandum of settlement. It will form part of this order. Both sides will be free to pursue their legal remedy in case of breach of any conditions. Satisfaction of the present liability to that extent is recorded.

¶24

In the light of the settlement now arrived

¶25

at, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he proposes to file the Crl.M.C to quash the proceedings to give a quietus to the criminal proceedings. Hence bail application is allowed as follows:

¶26

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the investigation officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-

¶27

Bail Appl..No. 530 of 2018

¶28

¶29

(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.

¶30

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.

¶31

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate

¶32

the defacto complainant or the witnesses.

¶33

(iv) He shall not get involved in any other

¶34

crime.

¶35

Anticipatory bail application is allowed as above.

¶36

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶37

R.AV

¶38

//True Copy//

¶39

PA to Judge

Ussainkutty Haji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ussainkutty Haji 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

Jishnu Manoj Vs State of Kerala

Ajoy L.S. Vs State of Kerala

Prasanthan Vs State of Kerala

Shaji, Vs State of Kerala

Pradeep Vs the State of Kerala

Krishnakumar S Vs State of Kerala