Allowed

Anitha Babu, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Dec 2021Bail Appl./7862/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order on an anticipatory bail application filed by Anitha Babu accused of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The High Court allowed the bail, directing the applicant to appear before the Investigating Officer and submit a bond with sureties on specified conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed subject to a bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with two sureties, appearance before IO, and surrender of passport.

Anitha Babu, Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA,

¶5

1943

¶6

BAIL APPL. NO. 7862 OF 2021

¶7

KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION CRIME NO.828/2018, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶8

PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED :

¶9

ANITHA BABU, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O. BABU GEORGE , RESIDING AT VAZHAVILA VEEDU, AMABALAKKARA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM 691 532.

¶10

BY ADVS. R.N.SANDEEP KEERTHI VIJAYAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶13

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM 691 001.

¶14

SRI M.C.ASHI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶18

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.

¶19

-----------------------------------------------------------

¶20

B.A.No. 7862 of 2021

¶21

----------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 21^st day of December, 2021

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶24

The offences alleged against the petitioner and the co-accused are punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶25

The allegations against the petitioner and the co-

¶26

accused are the following : Accused Nos.1 and 2 are business associates. With a devious intend, they have approached the de facto complainant, who is the proprietor of Jayalekshmi Cashew Exports, and offered to supply raw cashew nuts in shell at attractive prices. The 2nd accused is alleged to have introduced the applicant as a cashew broker. The de facto complainant was induced to believe that 500 MT of raw cashew nuts in shell would

¶27

be supplied to him at the rate of USD 1700 per MT. Various

¶28

¶29

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶30

agreements were also executed. By numerous transactions, a total sum of USD 7,85,818 was transferred to the account of M/s.Praise Exports - FZE, of which the applicant herein has business association. It is alleged that after receiving a part of the amount, the first accused had sent a forged Bill of Lading to the complainant showing the import of 304.740 MT of raw cashew. It was thereafter that the balance amount was got transferred through the bank. After receiving the entire amount, the accused failed to ship the raw cashew. When the amount was demanded back, the first accused had sent a forged debit advise for USD 7,85,815. A fake swift receipt was also allegedly forwarded. From

¶31

the money so obtained, a portion was sent to the account of the petitioner. She gave a cheque for Rs.2 Crores in relation to that transaction to the de facto complainant, but that cheque was dishonoured when presented in the Bank. According to the de facto complainant, by such acts, he has sustained a total loss of Rs.5.88 Crores.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶33

¶34

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶35

Report of the investigating officer is placed on record by the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the accused Nos.1 and 2 were already released on bail and the petitioner, who in tact has no connection with the alleged crime, has been brought in only on the basis of the allegation that some amount was transferred to the account maintained in her name. It is the contention of the learned counsel that there has been sale of cashew nuts under a totally different contract from the company to which the petitioner also has stake to a witness in this case. Transfer of money as aforesaid was in that transaction and only for the reason that no criminal offence can be attributed to the petitioner. The learned counsel further contended that having accused Nos.1 and 2 already been released on bail and on considering the age of the petitioner, she is entitled to get pre-arrest bail.

¶36

The learned Public Prosecutor on the other side would contend that the money received towards the sale proceeds on the basis of the promised sale of cashew nuts to the de facto complainant by accused Nos.1 and 2, was transferred to the

¶37

¶38

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶39

account of the petitioner and that certainly, would establish the complicity of the petitioner with the crime. The learned Public Prosecutor further would contend that in the light of the transfer of such amounts to the account of the petitioner, issuance of a cheque for Rs.2 Crores by the petitioner to the de facto complaint the petitioner cannot get absolved from the offence. It is also pointed out that the Bill of Lading given to the de facto complainant in the name of the company floated by accused Nos.1 and 2, was a forged one and from the money so received was transferred to the petitioner. The role of the petitioner in the commission of the crime is very much evident. For the said reasons, the learned Public Prosecutor contends, the petitioner is not entitled to get pre-arrest bail.

¶40

On a detailed analysis of the materials on record it can prima facie seen that the petitioner also has involved in the transactions which culminated in cheating of the de facto complainant and misappropriation of money swindled from the de facto complainant. Issuance of a cheque for an amount of Rs.2 Crores by the petitioner and its subsequent dishonour further

¶41

¶42

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶43

would substantiate the allegations against the petitioner. The investigation of the crime has been progressed to a good extent. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were already released on bail. The petitioner is aged above 50 years. At the initial stage, there was no allegation against the petitioner and her complicity, according to the prosecution, has come out only at a later stage. The entire transaction is borne by records. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in connection with another crime, the petitioner has been asked to report before police and she has been promptly obliging the said direction. Taking into account all such matters, I am of the view that detention of the petitioner during the period of investigation is not necessary.

¶44

Under the above circumstances, I am inclined to allow

¶45

the application. Hence, the bail application is allowed and the petitioner is therefore directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and in the event of being arrested, she shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs only) by her along with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶46

¶47

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

¶48

Investigating Officer, and on the following conditions:

¶49

(i) She shall appear before the Investigating

¶50

Officer as and when called for;

¶51

(ii) She shall not influence or intimidate witnesses

¶52

or tamper with evidence; and

¶53

(iii) She shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional Magistrate, before her release on

¶54

bail and if she does not have a passport, she

¶55

shall submit an affidavit to that effect.

¶56

(iv) During the bail period, she shall not get

¶57

involved in any offence.

¶58

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.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

amk

B.A.No.7862 of 2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶66

ANNEXURE A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT OF CRIME NO.828 OF 2018 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. ANNEXRUE A2 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED 26-06-2018 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.4037 OF 2018.

Anitha Babu, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anitha Babu, 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

Mohammed Musthafa T.V Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Ismail E.K. Vs State of Kerala

Arunputhran (Shaji) Vs State of Kerala

Shaji., Vs the State of Kerala

David Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Thoufeeq Vs State of Kerala