Allowed

Anupa Mery v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Dec 2021Bail Appl./272/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC for cheating instigation, the Court granted pre-arrest bail to the accused, noting lack of criminal antecedents and unavailability of incriminating evidence against her, while imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was released on bail on execution of a bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties subject to conditions of interrogation and cooperation.

Anupa Mery Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 272 OF 2021

¶5

CRIME NO.167/2020 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, KASARGOD

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

ANUPA MERY AGED 37 YEARS DAUGHTER OF T.A. ABRAHAM, MANAPURATH HOUSE, HOSAMAJALU, NELIYADI P.O, KADABA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA, KARNATAKA, PIN - 682023

¶8

BY ADV I.V.PRAMOD

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 ADDL.R2.JERIN GEORGE AGED 24 YEARS S/O. GEORGE JOSEPH, KAIPPALIYIL, HIDAYATH NAGAR, MADHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.671321.

¶12

IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 15/03/2021 IN CRL.M.A. NO.1/2021.

¶13

SMT.SREEJA.V-SR.PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶15

10.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 272 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.167/2020 of Kasaragod Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner/1^st accused has moved this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶20

The prosecution allegation is that this petitioner had instigated the defacto complainant to hand over a sum of Rs.2,11,000/- so as to procure a job for her son in Canada. As instigated and induced by this petitioner, the defacto complainant had deposited Rs.2,11,000/- in the account of the 2^nd accused. But the job was not arranged as promised and their intention was to cheat the defacto complainant.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit the in fact this petitioner has absolutely no transaction with the 2^nd accused. But a friend had introduced her to the 2^nd accused and so she also handed over certain money to the 2^nd accused under the hope that he would arrange a job for her in Kerala. But later she came to know that the intention of the 2^nd accused was to deceive her as well the defacto complainant. But unfortunately she has

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 272 OF 2021

¶23

¶24

been arraigned as the 1^st accused. In fact she is innocent.

¶25

The prosecution has no case that she is having any criminal antecedents. So also the prosecution case is to the effect that the amount was received by the 2^nd accused.

¶26

The petitioner is a lady aged 37 years. She has absolutely no criminal antecedents. Considering the nature of the accusation levelled against her, especially the fact that the amount had been received by the 2^nd accused, I think that custodial interrogation of this petitioner may not be required for the investigating agency to proceed with the investigation of the case. Therefore, I am inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to her, subject to the following conditions:

¶27

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the investigating officer in the event of her arrest.

¶28

(ii) She shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing. (iii) She shall co-operate with the investigation and trial of the case.

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 272 OF 2021

¶30

¶31

(iv) She shall not directly or indirectly, make any

¶32

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶33

(v) She shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶34

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned

¶35

Magistrate/Judge is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

SHIRCY V. JUDGE

¶38

mpm

Anupa Mery v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anupa Mery 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

Saseendran Nair R Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar P.P. Vs State of Kerala

Susilkumar E.K Vs the State of Kerala

Ansif A.H. Vs the State of Kerala

Jishnu v R Vs State of Kerala

Sujithkumar Diliprao Jagtap Vs State of Kerala