Allowed

Jinu Jayan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Aug 2020Bail Appl./1097/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala approved a bail application under Section 438 CrPC filed by an accused charged with offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC regarding cheating and criminal breach of trust. The court allowed bail on stringent conditions, including compliance with investigation procedures and social distancing norms.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is allowed on stringent conditions including bond execution for Rs.50,000 with two sureties, appearance for interrogation, social distancing compliance, and prohibition from leavi

Jinu Jayan Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1942

¶6

Bail Appl..No.1097 OF 2020

¶7

[CRIME NO.72 OF 2020 OF THE TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT]

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

JINU JAYAN AGED 29 YEARS S/O.N.VIJAYA KUMAR,RESIDING AT ADIYORA MADOM,KILIROOR NORTH.P.O,THIRUVARPPU, KOTTAYAM,NOW RESIDING AT PRESTIGE APPARTMENT,NEPTUNE COURTYARD,TOWER-1, MARINE DRIVE,KOCHI.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.AJOY VENU

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031.

¶13

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶14

3 ADDL.R3 VIJAYAN S/O RAMAN NAIR, NAKSHATRA HOUSE, 3/340(8), VI-CROSS, INDIRA NAGAR KSHB COLONY, KALLEPPULLY, PALAKKAD-678005.

¶15

IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R3 AS PER THE ORDER DATED 10/3/2020 IN CRL.MA NO.1/2020.

¶16

R1 AND R2 BY SRI.AJITH MURALI, PP

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 2

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Dated this the 14th day of August 2020

¶21

This Bail Application filed under Section 438

¶22

of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

¶23

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.

¶24

72 of 2020 of Town North Police Station, Palakkad District. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

¶25

3. The prosecution case is that, the

¶26

petitioner took a motor bike of the defacto complainant worth Rs.35 lakhs and pledged the same in a financial institution.

¶27

4. Heard the learned counsel for the

¶28

petitioner and the learned public prosecutor.

¶29

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the case of the defacto complainant

¶30

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 3

¶31

is not correct. Actually, there was some monetary transactions between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant issued a cheque and the same was dishonoured on 27.1.2020. When the petitioner was taking steps as per the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this false case was alleged against the petitioner. The counsel submitted that, the motor bike is already seized and is now in the custody of the police.

¶32

6. The learned public prosecutor, even though, opposed this bail application, submitted that, if this Court grant him bail, stringent conditions may be imposed.

¶33

7. After hearing both sides, I think, this

¶34

bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The admitted prosecution case is that the petitioner took a motor bike of the defacto complainant worth Rs.35 lakhs and pledged in a financial institution. I do not want to make any observations to the merits of the case. Now it is an admitted fact that, the motor bike is in the

¶35

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 4

¶36

custody of the police. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, this bail application is allowed on stringent conditions.

¶37

8. Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020) and a Full Bench of this Court in W.P(C)No.9400 of 2020 issued various salutary directions for minimizing the number of inmates inside prisons.

¶38

9. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that, the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870), after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that, the accused has the opportunity of

¶39

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 5

¶40

securing fair trial.

¶41

10. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:

¶42

1. The petitioner shall appear

¶43

before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

¶44

2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a bond

¶45

for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;

¶46

3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required.

¶47

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 6

¶48

The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or

¶49

to any police officer;

¶50

4. The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the Court;

¶51

5. The petitioner shall not

¶52

commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;

¶53

6. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social distancing in the

¶54

B.A. NO.1097 OF 2020 7

¶55

wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

¶56

7. If any of the above conditions

¶57

are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN