Allowed

Kilar Mazhoor K.P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Sept 2020Bail Appl./4078/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to an accused charged with cheating under IPC Sections 406 and 420. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the accused's lack of criminal antecedents and willingness to cooperate, directing surrender within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; applicant directed to surrender within two weeks; execution of bond for Rs.50,000/ with two sureties; conditions to appear, not tamper with evidence, and avoid similar offen

Kilar Mazhoor K.P. Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 17TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl.No.4078 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.228/2020 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station, Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

KILAR MAZHOOR K.P. AGED 32 YEARS, KARINGAPPARA, KALPAKANCHERI P.O., MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN -676 551.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASLAM

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.*

¶13

3 JINU SCARIA ALENCHERY HOUSE, THURUTHY P. O, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM, KERALA-686535.*

¶14

*ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27.07.2020 IN CRL.MA NO. 1 OF 2020 IN BA NO. 4078 OF 2020.

¶15

OTHERS PRESENT:

¶16

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, SR PP

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Bail Appl.No.4078 OF 2020

¶19

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Dated this the 8th day of September 2020

¶22

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

¶23

The applicant is the accused in Crime No.228/2020 of Ernakulam Central Police Station, for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C.

¶24

The applicant is the Developmental Director of educational institutions being run under the name and style “Apex Institute of Management and Multiskills”, where various courses for management and logistics conducted by the Bharathiar University are offered to the students. It is submitted that the petitioner had dishonestly induced the defacto complainant to join the course of Management in Logistics under the Bharathiar University and induced him to deliver amount towards the payment of fees and also made him spend a total sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs, including all expenses. But he was not included in the course in the University and thus misappropriated the amount and cheated the defacto

¶25

Bail Appl.No.4078 OF 2020

¶26

¶27

complainant.

¶28

The applicant states that the defacto complainant had paid only Rs.70,500/- towards course fee, which was actually Rs.80,000/- and that the defacto complainant was included in the course, which can be evidenced by Annexure-2, the student I.D.Card issued to the defacto complainant for Diploma in Logistics and Supply Chain Management. Because of the pandemic situation, the Courses were delayed and a notification was issued on 14.04.2020 by the Bharathiar University as evidenced by Annexure-3. The applicant states that he has absolutely no control over the affairs of the University and he is only facilitating the students for joining different courses conducted by the University. He states that he has not appropriated any amount as alleged by the defacto complainant, and therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail since he is apprehending arrest.

¶29

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶30

The applicant has no criminal antecedents. From the documents produced by him, it is clear that the

¶31

¶32

Bail Appl.No.4078 OF 2020

¶33

defacto complainant did join the course for Diploma in Logistics and Supply Chain Management. Definitely, the amount paid by him towards fees would have been remitted to the University and that is why the University has issued the I.D.Card. The defacto complainant was served with the notice, but none appeared. Considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and that he is willing to co-operate with the investigation, I find that custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary.

¶34

In the result, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks. After interrogation and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be released on bail on the 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 Investigating Officer, and on the following conditions:

¶35

(i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for;

¶36

(ii) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or

¶37

Bail Appl.No.4078 OF 2020

¶38

tamper with evidence; and

¶39

(iii)During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any similar offences.

¶40

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

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

dkr

Kilar Mazhoor K.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kilar Mazhoor K.P. 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

Sidique Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil.P.P Vs State of Kerala

Stalin Vs State of Kerala

Thrideep Vs State of Kerala

Ajith Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Renjith Raveendran Vs State of Kerala