Dismissed

Shivaprasad v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Oct 2019Bail Appl./6130/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge denied pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC. Court found allegations of record fabrication and fund misappropriation credible, not frivolous, rejecting bail plea while directing surrender for regular bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to surrender to Investigating Officer forthwith for regular bail consideration; bail applications dismissed.

Shivaprasad Vs State of Kerala — Corruption | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 17TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.6130 OF 2019

¶6

CRIME NO.733/2019 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

SHIVAPRASAD, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ELAYADATHOEI MALAYIL HOUSE, MARUTHUR P.O., PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679 336

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.S.RENJITH SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (NELLAD)

¶10

RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶12

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.

¶13

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 316

¶14

3 SALIM, PARTNER, NIBAS BAG, S/O BEERU, ELLUMALACHALIL HOUSE, CHENGARA, PATTIMATTOM, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 562

¶15

ADDL. KITEX GARMENTS LTD, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO, R4 ERNAKULAM, PIN-683562, REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR, SAJEEV KOSHI, AGED 65, S/O KOSHI.

¶16

ADDL. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5/9/2019 IN CRL.MA NO.1/2019 IN BA-6130/2019.

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SMT. K. SHEEBA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6205/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶21

..2..

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶23

PRESENT

¶24

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶25

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 17TH ASWINA, 1941

¶26

Bail Appl..No.6205 OF 2019

¶27

CRIME NO.777/2019 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶28

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶29

SIVAPRASAD, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ELAYADATHODI MALAYIL HOUSE, MARUTHUR P.O, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD PIN 679 336

¶30

BY ADVS. SRI.S.RENJITH SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (NELLAD)

¶31

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶32

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

¶33

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 316.

¶34

3 SAJEEV KOSHI, S/O. KOSHI, DIRECTOR, KITEX GARMENTS LTD, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O, EERNAKULAM, PIN 683562

¶35

R3 BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE R1 & R2 BY SRI.AJITH MURALI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶36

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6130/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶37

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶38

..3..

¶39

ORDER

¶40

These applications are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶41

The applicant herein has approached this Court seeking pre-arrest bail in two crimes, viz., Crime No. 733 of 2019 and Crime No. 777 of 2019 registered at the Kunnathunadu Police Station. Crime No. 733 of 2019 is registered under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC and Crime No. 777 of 2019 is registered under Sections 408, 420, 468, 471, 120(b) r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

¶42

It appears from the records that the applicant herein was the Purchase and Store in-Charge of Kitex Garments Ltd. In Crime No.733 of 2019, the allegation is that a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was transferred to a vendor company from the account of Kitex and thereafter, the recipient of the money was informed that it was a wrong credit and he was requested to re-transfer the money to the account of the applicant. According to the prosecution, the amount was transferred from the account of Kitex and this was clandestinely done to cause

¶43

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶44

..4..

¶45

wrongful loss to the company. It is based on information furnished by Sri.Salim, the partner of Nibas Bag, the 3^rd respondent in BA No.6130/2019, that the crime was registered.

¶46

In Crime No.777 of 2019, the allegation is that the applicant entered into a conspiracy with the Directors of the Company by name Apparel Lining & Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and with the aid of certain employees of Kitex, placed a fraudulent order by creating bills and documents for four loads of polyester inter lining material. It is alleged that the materials ordered were not supplied by the Apparel Lining & Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Instead, fake invoices were created and with the aid of accused Nos. 2 & 3, and later, records were fabricated to make it appear that the goods were actually delivered. It is alleged that by his acts, the applicant defrauded the company and caused wrongful loss to the tune of Rs.39.41 lakhs.

¶47

Sri.S.Renjith, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submits that the entire allegations levelled against the applicant are without basis. According to the learned counsel, based on frivolous accusations, Crime No. 688 of 2019 was registered earlier and while granting bail on 01.08.2019, the learned Magistrate imposed

¶48

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶49

..5..

¶50

stringent conditions and he has been diligently complying with the same. In that view of the matter, it would only be unjust to force him to undergo custodial interrogation. The learned counsel further contends that the entire records in connection with the aforesaid crime were seized by the police and he has nothing further to disclose. Insofar Crime No. 777 of 2019 is concerned, it is argued that it is next to impossible to fabricate records and make false entries in the records as alleged by the informant. According to the learned counsel, it is with a view to remove him from service that false allegations have been raised.

¶51

The learned Public Prosecutor, while opposing the prayer, submitted that the investigation conducted till date reveals that the applicant herein with the aid of rest of the accused has fabricated records and used the same as genuine to defraud the informant. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, though the applicant was arrested in Crime No. 688 of 2019, his custody was not granted to the police .

¶52

The de facto complainant in Crime No. 777 of 2019 has entered appearance through counsel. It is contended that the applicant

¶53

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶54

..6..

¶55

herein, in a systemic manner, manipulated records and has siphoned off huge sums of money from the company. Implicit faith was placed on the applicant and it was by misusing the trust reposed on him that the records were manipulated and wrongful loss was caused. It is further urged that the entire amounts, which were siphoned off, were through the bank account of the applicant and his wife, and if a proper investigation is not carried out, the applicant would go scot free.

¶56

I have considered the submissions advanced and have perused the records, which were made available by the learned Public Prosecutor. From the materials made available, it appears that the applicant herein is involved in three crimes. All the crimes pertain to fabrication of false records and misappropriation of huge sums of money from Kitex Ltd. By no stretch of imagination, can it be said that the allegations are frivolous and vexatious. Having regard to the nature of allegations, the role assigned to the applicant, the stage of investigation and attendant facts, I am not persuaded to grant an order of pre arrest bail to the applicant.

¶57

At this stage, Sri.S.Renjith, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submits that the applicant is prepared to co-operate with

¶58

Bail Appl..Nos.6130 & 6205 OF 2019

¶59

..7..

¶60

the investigation and prays for issuance of necessary orders.

¶61

In view of the said submission, I direct the applicant to surrender before the Investigating officer forthwith. He shall be interrogated and

¶62

shall later be produced before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. If an application for regular bail is preferred, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed expeditiously and on its merits, ideally on the same day itself.

¶63

These applications are dismissed.

¶64

SD/-

¶65

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

¶66

JUDGE

¶67

Bka/09.10.2019

¶68

//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE

Shivaprasad v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaprasad 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

Muhammed Sayeed.M.a Vs State of Kerala

Geeson Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu P.U. Vs State of Kerala

Sreekala Vs State of Kerala

Rafi.S.M. Vs State of Kerala

K.R.Indira Vs State of Kerala