Allowed

Naseer.K.Habeeb @ Biju, v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Apr 2019Bail Appl./1828/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order granting anticipatory bail to an accused who was the manager of a business concern and was alleged to have misappropriated funds. The court found no need for custodial interrogation and granted bail on conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted by directing police to release the petitioner on execution of a bond for Rs.40,000/- with two sureties and compliance with specific reporting conditions.

Naseer.K.Habeeb @ Biju, Vs the State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1828 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 12390/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,NEYYATTINKARA

¶7

CRIME NO.81/2019 OF Thiruvallam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

NASEER.K.HABEEB @ BAIJU, AGED 54 YEARS S/O. A.H.M SAHIB, 17B, OAK LEAF, HEERA SWISS TOWN, KANJIRAMPARA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALLAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695 027

¶14

ADDL. SURENDRA DAS

¶15

R3 AGED 63 YEARS,S/O LATE BHANU PANICKER PROPRIETOR,KASAVUMALIKA, THIRUVALLAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695027 ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27-03-2019 IN CRLMA NO-01/2019.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

-2-

¶19

Bail Appl..No. 1828 of 2019

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner is the accused in Crime

¶22

No.81/2019 of Thiruvallam Police Station registered

¶23

for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC.

¶24

The petitioner has filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

It appears that the petitioner was the

¶27

Manager of the business concern of the 3^rd respondent. It is alleged that the petitioner misappropriated about 4.5 crores of rupees belonging to the business concern of the 3^rd respondent. The learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent has submitted that the petitioner had issued, signed bank cheques

¶28

-3-

¶29

Bail Appl..No. 1828 of 2019

¶30

entrusted by the 3^rd respondent with the petitioner, to different persons. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there were two accountants and other persons to monitor the accounts of the concern and it was only because of the reason that some persons initiated prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act against the 3^rd respondent herein that the 3^rd respondent filed the above complaint against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent has submitted that all the documents relating to the transactions are available with the 3^rd respondent. In view of the above submission, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the progress of the

¶31

-4-

¶32

Bail Appl..No. 1828 of 2019

¶33

investigation of the case. That apart, there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner. Therefore,

¶34

an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner will be justified.

¶35

In the result, this bail application stands allowed and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.81/2019 of Thiruvallam Police Station, on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the 2^nd respondent, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following further conditions:-

¶36

-5-

¶37

Bail Appl..No. 1828 of 2019

¶38

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for four months and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶39

The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

Nkr/08.04.2019

Naseer.K.Habeeb @ Biju, v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseer.K.Habeeb @ Biju, 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

Jojo Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Vamban Hamza Vs the Sho, Irikkur Police Station

Murali, Vs State

Sonal, Vs State of Kerala

Asha Sajeevan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala