Dismissed

Krishnan Nair N v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Nov 2020Bail Appl./4790/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 438 CrPC, the court rejected an application for anticipatory bail filed by an accused who was a General Manager and Director of a State-owned finance company allegedly involved in cheating depositors. The court directed the applicant to surrender forthwith.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; applicant directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks.

Krishnan Nair N 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

FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 15TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.4790 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.2556/2018 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

KRISHNAN NAIR N, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, VADAKKEKKARA USHUS VEEDU, VAZHOTTUKONAM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. PIN-695013 BY ADVS. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD SMT.ANITHA M.N. (EKM) SMT.BINDU GOPINATH

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031 2 ADDL. R2 JOSE K.A., S/O ABRAHAM , KOLLAMPARAMBIL SHARON KEEZHVANMURI, PANDANADU CHENGANNOOR , ALAPPUZHA PIN-689506 IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 21/8/2020 IN CRL. MA 1/2020 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

SRI.E.C.BINEESH - PP

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

B.A.No.4790 OF 2020

¶15

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Dated this the 06th day of November 2020

¶18

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶19

The applicant is the 1staccused in Crime

¶20

No.2556/2018 of Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta,

¶21

for having allegedly committed offences punishable under
Sections 406, 420 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. Presently, the
investigation has been taken up by the Crime Branch and
the Crime has been re-numbered as

¶22

279/CB/KLM&PTA/R/2019. The applicant was initially
employed as the Branch Manager of the Thiruvalla Branch
of the Kerala Housing Finance Ltd. Subsequently, he was
promoted as the General Manager of the Company and as
representative of the employees, he was also made a
Director of the Company. The applicant has allegedly
dishonestly induced and accepted huge sums of money
from various depositors running to about Rs. 80 Crores and
thereafter, the company fell into liquidation and

¶23

B.A.No.4790 OF 2020

¶24

¶25

proceedings are still pending to liquidate the company. The
Managing Director of the Company, who is the 2ndaccused,
was arrested on 19.03.2020. The applicant was also
arrested in a connected matter.

¶26

2.The applicant states that he is innocent and that
he was only a paid employee of the company and has
nothing to do with the assets of the company. He has not
been enriched because of the alleged act of cheating by the
company and he is a Senior citizen aged 63 years old.
Custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be
necessary and he is willing to co-operate with the
investigation. The present Manager of the Thiruvalla
Branch, who is the 3rdaccused, was already granted bail by
this Court. The applicant states that he is also a General
Manager and a paid employee and therefore, he need not
be incarcerated for any purpose. It is also stated that the
Company Law Tribunal has ceased the matter regarding
the liquidation and an officer has been appointed, who has
taken over all the assets of the company, which is worth
more than 100 Crores and the company also has to recover

¶27

B.A.No.4790 OF 2020

¶28

¶29

about 80 Crores from the customers due to them. The
assets are sufficient to take care of the entire debts and
liabilities of the company. And, therefore, the applicant is
in a helpless situation. He cannot help the investigation in
the event of his arrest and therefore, seeks anticipatory
bail.

¶30

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. The applicant
was employed as a General Manager and he was also
appointed as one of the Directors. It was the Managing
Director, the 2ndaccused, who was the responsible person
to manage the affairs of the company. He was arrested and
his custodial interrogation is also over. The applicant was
also arrested in a connected matter and there was nothing
for him to contribute towards the investigation. The
applicant is still willing to assess the investigation and his
incarceration during this age, particularly, during the
pandemic times may not serve any purpose. Hence, the
learned counsel appearing for the applicant urges this
Court to be indulgent enough to grant him bail.

¶31

B.A.No.4790 OF 2020

¶32

¶33

4.The learned Public Prosecutor has, on the other
hand, submitted that crores of rupees have been cheated
from the public and therefore the applicant as a Director of
the company is responsible. Apart from being a Director,
he is also a General Manager, entrusted with the
management of the affairs of the Company. He is therefore
answerable to the public. He cannot get anticipatory bail in
an economic offence of this proportion.

¶34

5.After having considered the arguments raised by
both sides, I find that the company is involved in cheating a
number of depositors. The name of the company would
suggest that it is a company owned by the State of Kerala
and probably that is what induced several persons to
deposit their hard-earned money in the company. The
applicant cannot shirk off the responsibility, since he was
not a simple Branch Manager, but the General Manager of
the company entrusted with the responsibility of all the
branches in the State. He was also made a Director of the
company and therefore, he cannot pretend to be totally
ignorant of the affairs of the company and put the entire

¶35

B.A.No.4790 OF 2020

¶36

¶37

liabilities on the Managing Director.

¶38

Under the circumstances, I find that the applicant
cannot get the benefits of the extraordinary remedy of
anticipatory bail in this case. I am relying on the decision
of P.Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement
[2019 KHC 6886 SC : (2019) 9 SCC 24]and hence, the
applicant is directed to surrender before the Investigating
Officer within two weeks. In the event of his being arrested,
he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court where
he is at liberty to apply for regular bail and the bail
application so filed by him shall be considered and disposed
of preferably on the very same day, taking into
consideration, the mitigating circumstances in favour of the
applicant.

¶39

 Sd/-
 ASHOK MENON
 JUDGE

¶40

NR/09/11/20

Krishnan Nair N v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnan Nair N 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiji P R Vs State of Kerala

Hrishikradh@ Sagar Vs State of Kerala

Afsal Vs State of Kerala

Sunny Cleetus Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Chandran Vs State of Kerala