Allowed

Legeesh S.L. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Dec 2021Bail Appl./8862/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of cheating and criminal breach of trust. Noting partial repayment of dues before FIR registration, the court held detention unnecessary during investigation but imposed strict conditions including surrendering passport and appearing for weekly interrogations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender within two weeks; shall be released on bail upon execution of bond for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and compliance of specific conditions.

Legeesh S.L. 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

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 8862 OF 2021

¶5

CRIME NO.2010 OF 2021 OF CHANGANASSERY POLICE STATION,

KOTTAYAM

PETITIONER:

LEGEESH S.L.,

AGED 38 YEARS, SON OF LATHIKUMAR S., SRI VAISHAK, T.C.NO.23-63, VALIYASALA, CHALAI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695036.

¶10

BY ADV V.S.THOSHIN

¶11

RESPONDENT:

¶12

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

¶13

SMT C.SEENA-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.8862 of 2021

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.

¶19

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

¶20

B.A.No. 8862 of 2021

¶21

----------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16^th 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 petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.2010 of 2021 of Changanassery Police Station. The offences alleged

¶25

are under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶26

The allegations are that the petitioner offered job as Nurse in the Ministry of Kuwait to the daughter of the de facto complainant and received an amount of Rs.5 lakhs in

¶27

two instalments, on 03.02.2018 and 06.02.2018. The petitioner did not arrange the job as promised or paid back the money. The petitioner with deceptive intention of cheating

¶28

the de facto complainant had received the money and misappropriated it. Thereby, the petitioner has committed the aforesaid offences.

¶29

¶30

B.A.No.8862 of 2021

¶31

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

¶32

The learned Public Prosecutor has placed on record the report of the Sub Inspector of Police, Changanassery Police Station.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner with good intention has involved in the incident and only because of the change in employment rules in Kuwait in the meantime, he could not arrange job as promised. It is further contended that the petitioner on realising that he would not be able to arrange the job, returned a part of the amount, which he had received from the de facto complainant and that will establish that he did not have any intention to cheat, but only with good intention received the money and attempted to got a job to the daughter of the de facto complainant. The counsel would also submit that the petitioner would repay the entire amount and only due to financial stringency that he could not repay the amount immediately. On such grounds, the learned counsel

¶34

seeks to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶35

¶36

B.A.No.8862 of 2021

¶37

The learned Public Prosecutor would contend that the petitioner is an accused in one more crime, viz. Crime No.427 of 2021 in Karimkunnam Police Station, which also was registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C. Considering that fact and the stage of investigation of this crime, the learned Public Prosecutor seeks to dismiss the application.

¶38

True, when a person is involved in several crimes of

¶39

similar nature, normal rule shall be not to entertain an application for anticipatory bail, being it a discretionary remedy. In this case, the petitioner repaid a part of the amount, which he has received even before the registration of the crime itself. Initially, he repaid Rs.30,000/-. Later, after the registration of the crime, an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was also paid back by the petitioner to the de facto complainant. I am not forgetting the fact that payment of the misappropriated amount will not efface the offence committed by a person. The incident took place during February 2018. The crime was registered only on 07.09.2021. Taking all such matters into consideration, I am of the view that the

¶40

¶41

B.A.No.8862 of 2021

¶42

detention of the petitioner during the period of investigation is unnecessary in this case. However, while granting bail, the petitioner has to abide by strict conditions in order to avoid recurrence of such crimes in future at the instance of the petitioner.

¶43

In such circumstances, this bail application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. After interrogation and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:

¶44

(i) Once released on bail, he shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Wednesdays between 10.00 a.m. and 11 a.m. for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier;

¶45

(ii) He shall not go abroad without the permission of the jurisdictional Court and shall surrender his passport before the investigating officer, and in case he does not

¶46

¶47

B.A.No.8862 of 2021

¶48

have a passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect;

¶49

(iii) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence; and

¶50

(iv) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any offence.

¶51

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall

¶52

be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶55

dkr

Legeesh S.L. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Legeesh S.L. 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

Abimon Vs State of Kerala

Mohanan @ Ganapathi Assari Vs State of Kerala

Xxx Vs the State of Kerala

Prameela, Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Illyas, Vs State of Kerala

Nirmalan Vs State of Kerala