Allowed

Bijina Anna Mathew v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jul 2020Bail Appl./3027/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a pre-arrest bail application filed by the first accused in a cheating case. Finding no specific evidence that the petitioner misappropriated funds or had a specific share in the transaction, the court granted bail subject to conditions, including appearance before investigators and cooperation.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed, directing surrender within two weeks and release on bail on a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties.

Bijina Anna Mathew Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2020 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.3027 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.225/2020 OF Konni Police Station , Pathanamthitta

¶7

PETITIONER/A1:

¶8

BIJINA ANNA MATHEW AGED 35 YEARS D/O MATHAI.M.V,MAYILANDANPARA HOUSE, KUNNATHUMKARA.P.O, EAST OTHARA, ERAVIPEROOR,THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KONNI POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689691.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.AMJAD ALI SR PP

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA 3027/20

O R D E R

Dated this the 1st day of July 2020

¶20

Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.225/2020 of

¶21

Konni Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC, in furtherance of common intention with the second accused.

¶22

The prosecution case in brief is thus:

¶23

The petitioner is conducting an IELTS Coaching Centre at Thiruvalla by name 'Aman's International IELTS Initiative'. The second accused is running an institution named 'Nathaniel Travels and Academy Pvt. Ltd.' at Bangalore, which mainly is concerned with manpower recruitment in different European countries and in the Gulf. The prosecution case is that the petitioner had in furtherance of common intention with the second accused to cheat, dishonestly induced the defacto complainant to deliver a total sum of Rs.8,00,000/- by offering employment as Nurse to the defacto complainant in the Ministry of Health at Kuwait. The allegation is that the defacto complainant was for the aforesaid purpose dishonestly induced

¶24

¶25

BA 3027/20

¶26

to transfer an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- into the Bank account of the petitioner on 10.10.2018 and thereafter a further sum of Rs.2,00,000/- into the account of the second accused on 23.10.2018. But the visa was never provided and the entire amount was dishonestly misappropriated by the petitioner and the second accused, and the defacto complainant was cheated. In consequence of that the crime was registered. The petitioner states that she is innocent and her job was only to conduct IELTS Institute to provide training to the Nurses and other aspirants going abroad. She had only facilitated the defacto complainant and others to approach the second accused who was arranging job abroad. She has got nothing to do with the alleged transaction between the second accused and the defacto complainant. It is also the case of the defacto complainant that the petitioner had transferred Rs.6,00,000/- which was deposited in her account, to the second accused and hence, nothing is seen appropriated by her. The petitioner therefore prays that she may be released on pre-arrest bail as she is innocent and has got nothing to do with the alleged cheating. The petitioner also does

¶27

¶28

BA 3027/20

¶29

not have any criminal antecedents, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶30

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I find that there is no specific evidence regarding the petitioner appropriating any amount. The very case of the defacto complainant is that the petitioner was paid the amount for further transmission to the second accused and accordingly Rs.6,00,000/- was transmitted to the account of the second accused and Rs.2,00,000/- was directly paid by the defacto complainant to the second accused. There is no evidence at present as to whether the petitioner had any specific share in the said amount paid to the second accused. The petitioner also does not have any criminal antecedents. She has a permanent place of aboard and there is no possibility of her absconding. Notice was served on the defacto complainant. But she did not appear. Under the circumstances, I find that the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail.

¶31

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed and the

¶32

¶33

BA 3027/20

¶34

petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks, and after interrogation, in the event of her being arrested, she shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, on the following conditions:

¶35

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

¶36

(ii) She shall not intimidate or influence the

¶37

witnesses.

¶38

(iii) She shall not get involved in any similar offence during the currency of the bail.

¶39

In case of breach of any of the above bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail.

¶40

Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶41

Bijina Anna Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijina Anna Mathew 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

George Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh @ Kunju Vs the Station House Officer

Biju P.Nair Vs State of Kerala

Sreesanth T.S. Vs the State of Kerala

Bindhu Vs State of Kerala

P.Biju Vs State of Kerala