Allowed

K.G. Sajan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Mar 2021Bail Appl./1753/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application sought anticipatory relief under Section 438 Cr.PC in a cheating case involving alleged gold pledging fraud. The learned Single Judge allowed the application, observing no conspiracy with bank employees and noting the applicant's willingness to repay and cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; directed to surrender within two weeks; release on bail upon execution of bond with sureties upon arrest if executed.

K.G. Sajan Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.1753 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.1883/2020 OF Pala Police Station, Kottayam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

K.G. SAJAN AGED 33 YEARS KALAYITHUNKAL HOUSE, EZHUMUTTAM P.O., THODUPUZHAM IDUKKI-685603 685603

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

SANTHOSH PETER, SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA 1753/2021

O R D E R

Dated this the 2nd day of March 2021

¶19

This is an application seeking anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 Cr.PC.

¶20

The applicant is the fourth accused in Crime No.1883/2020 of Pala Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 408, 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶21

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant in furtherance of common intention with accused Nos.1 to 3 who are employees of Mini Muthoot (Kerala) Ltd., Branch Pala, during the period 5.3.2020 to 8.7.2020 on various dates, obtained loans to a tune of Rs.40.82 lakhs on pledging 1057.30 grams of gold as security. But, in fact, only 416.30 grams of gold was actually received by the Bank towards which a loan of only Rs.1.36 lakhs alone could have advanced and thereby the applicant in furtherance of common intention concocted forged documents and cheated the Bank.

¶22

The applicant states that the allegations are not true. He had received only an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- towards the loan by pledging sufficient gold belonging to him. It is stated that seven packets of Gold have been pledged by him, out of which five packets contained gold ornaments and two packets were found to be empty. The applicant pledged a total gold of 434.7 grams as

¶23

BA 1753/2021

¶24

¶25

security. He has also produced documents pertaining to that, which indicate that he had pledged gold on seven occasions separately and obtained a total loan of Rs.13.5 lakhs. The applicant has also repaid Rs.3.5 lakhs towards that loans and he is also willing to repay the balance amount actually obtained by him as the loan together with interest. The applicant states that for any misappropriation or fraud deployed by the employees of the Bank, the applicant is not responsible, and therefore, he seeks pre-arrest bail. The applicant submits that he has no criminal antecedents as well and is ready to cooperate with the investigation.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is pointed out that accused 1 to 3 are employees of the Bank. In case, the loan is advanced by the employees of the Bank, it is also their responsibility and if they had colluded with the applicant, there must be a specific allegation regarding that. In the instant case, there is no allegation of any conspiracy between the employees of the Bank and the applicant. The applicant has also repaid a portion of the amount of the loan, which indicates that he was earnest in his attempt to repay the loan and that he has expressed his willingness to clear off the entire loan. Under the circumstances, I find that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is of no consequence. The applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation and subject himself to

¶27

BA 1753/2021

¶28

¶29

interrogation otherwise than in incarceration.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

K.G. Sajan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.G. Sajan 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

Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Shoukkath Vs State of Kerala

Subaidha Vs State of Kerala

Jackson Vs State of Kerala

Sreejith Vs State of Kerala

Ranjith Balakrishnan Vs State of Kerala