Allowed

Sugathan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jul 2020Bail Appl./1630/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed an anticipatory bail application for an accused implicated in cheque dishonour and cheating offences. The court considered the accused's clean antecedents and the pandemic context, directing surrender within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Court allowed anticipatory bail, directing surrender within two weeks; if arrested, to be released on bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.1630 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.410/2019 OF ALATHUR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶7

APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.3:

¶8

SUGATHAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAPANICKER, PALAPPURAM P.O., OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI. C.N.PRABHAKARAN – SR.PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B.A.No.1630 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 08^th day of July, 2020

¶19

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶20

The petitioner is the 3^rd accused in Crime No.410 of 2019 of Alathur Police Station, Palakkad, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 379, 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution case in brief is that the 1^st accused who is the step father of the defacto complainant clandestinely obtained some of his signed cheque leaves and misusing those, the petitioner herein, who is the 3^rd accused, filed a private complaint against the defacto complainant as C.C.No.859 of 2018, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ottapalam, and it is pending trial. Similarly, the 2^nd accused also was handed over another cheque by the 1^st accused, who also filed another similar case under Section 138 of the NI Act, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alathur. On the complaint filed by the defacto complainant, the petitioners 1 to 3 were implicated and the

¶21

B.A.No.1630 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

crime was registered. Accused 1 and 2 have already been released on bail on anticipatory bail. The petitioner states that he has no criminal antecedents. He has a permanent place of aboard and he is willing to co-operate with the investigation and therefore, he may be released on a pre arrest bail.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Admittedly, the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. The only allegation is that he had filed a complaint using the cheque, that was handed over by the 1^st accused, who is none other than the step father of the defacto complainant. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents and considering the present pandemic situation, incarceration may not be required.

¶25

In the result, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶26

B.A.No.1630 OF 2020

¶27

¶28

jurisdictional court and on further following conditions:

¶29

(i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as

¶30

and when called for.

¶31

(ii) He shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

¶32

(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

¶33

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail.

¶34

The bail application is allowed.

¶35

Sd/ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶36

NR/08/07/20

Sugathan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sugathan 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

Shihabudheen Vs the State of Kerala

Sajitha Kumari Vs State of Kerala

Kunhiraman K., Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Nishad, Vs State of Kerala

Moideen Jaisal K. Vs the State of Kerala

Flexil @ Kichu Vs State of Kerala