Dismissed

Rajanish Thamban v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Dec 2020Bail Appl./5161/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail in a cheating case involving alleged misappropriation of funds. The court directed the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks and allowed him to apply for regular bail if arrested.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; applicant directed to surrender within two weeks; liberty granted only if arrested for regular bail consideration.

Rajanish Thamban 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

TUESDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5161 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.759/2020 OF Kodanad Police Station, Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

RAJANISH THAMBAN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O P.N. THAMBAN, PALAMALIL HOUSE, PAYYAL, NEDUNGAPRA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,ERNAKULAM PIN-683545

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.VARGHESE SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR SMT.SANJANA RACHEL JOSE

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN

¶13

OTHERS PRESENT:

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Bail Appl..No.5161 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Dated this the 8th day of December 2020

¶19

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶20

The applicant is the accused in Crime No.759/2020 of Kodanad Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 418, 419 and 420 IPC.

¶21

The prosecution case, in brief, is that while the applicant was working as Senior Clerk in the Forest and Wildlife Division, Malayattoor, he allegedly misappropriated amounts deposited by beneficiaries in the GST account maintained in the name of the DFO and thus committed the offence. The applicant states that none of the beneficiaries has raised any complaint about not getting the amounts credited to the GST accounts and moreover, certain discrepancies which were noted later, have been rectified by the applicant by the deposit of the amounts, and it is only subsequent to that the present crime has been registered. He has no criminal antecedents and is willing to cooperate with the investigation.

¶22

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

¶23

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the applicant who has been working as a Clerk in the DFO's office has fraudulently and dishonestly transferred about Rs.13 lakhs from the GST account of the DFO to his own account, after acquiring the password and the ID of the DFO's account clandestinely. When the alleged transfer came

¶24

Bail Appl..No.5161 OF 2020

¶25

¶26

to the fore and was discovered by the officials, he transferred some of the amounts back to the account. But, according to the Prosecution, there are still more amounts to be recovered from him. The crime was registered and the investigation will have to be continued to unravel the methods deployed by the applicant to secure the user-id and password of the DFO's account. It is also to be ascertained whether there are other persons involved in the crime. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the extraordinary remedy of anticipatory bail, submits the learned Prosecutor.

¶27

After having heard the submissions made by both sides, I find that the applicant who was employed as a Clerk has committed a grave offence of cheating and transferring the money accounted in the DFO's account to his own account. Under the circumstances, he definitely will have to be interrogated by the investigating officer to unravel the methods he had deployed for transferring the amount. The mere statement that some of the amounts has been reinstated by him to the account of the DFO alone will not exonerate him of the offence, although it may be a mitigating circumstance. He is definitely not entitled to a pre-arrest bail, which is an extraordinary remedy which can be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

¶28

Hence, the application is disposed of with a direction to the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of his being arrested, after interrogation and recovery, if any, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court, where he is at liberty to apply for regular bail, which shall be

¶29

Bail Appl..No.5161 OF 2020

¶30

¶31

considered and preferably disposed of by the jurisdictional court on the very same day, keeping in view the mitigating circumstances pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

Rajanish Thamban v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajanish Thamban 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

Sajin Vs State of Kerala

Jose Thomas Vs Sub Inspector Of Police

Albin Wilson Vs Public Prosecutor

M.S Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Jollyamma Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Azghar Vs State of Kerala