Allowed

Biju Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Aug 2022Bail Appl./2821/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, the first accused in a cheating/forgery case, subject to stringent conditions including surrender, cooperation with investigation, and execution of a bond with sureties, while clarifying police powers to investigate.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed subject to surrender, execution of bond with sureties, appearance on summons, cooperation with investigation, and non-interference with evidence or witnesses.

Biju Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 28TH SRAVANA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 2821 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

¶7

BIJU KUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS VAZHATTU HOUSE, MENJANYAM AMSOM, KODERICHAL, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673525

¶8

BY ADVS. P.JERIL BABU SRINATH GIRISH PRASUDHA.S

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶10

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

¶11

2 SHAUKATH AGED 39 YEARS S/O MAMMU, AGED 39YEARS, VILLIAPPALLY, MAYANNUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673542

¶12

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.C.ASHI

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 2

¶15

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

¶16

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

¶17

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022

¶18

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

¶19

Dated this the 19^th day of August, 2022

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Application for anticipatory bail.

¶22

Petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.246

¶23

of 2022 of Vatakara Police Station, Kozhikode registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 406, 417, 420, 465, 468, 471, and 120 B of IPC.

¶24

The prosecution case is that the petitioner agreed to purchase the property of 2nd respondent which is situated at Wayanad and entered into an agreement with him. The petitioner after forging the seal and slip of Canara Bank, sent the same to the defacto complainant and thus secured his trust. After that, the petitioner obtained an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- from the defacto complainant. The petitioner, after receiving the money from the

¶25

defacto complainant, neither purchased the property

¶26

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 3

¶27

nor returned the amount, and thereby committed the alleged offences.

¶28

The petitioner submits that he has been

¶29

falsely implicated in the above said crime. The

¶30

petitioner further submits that he is a businessman, and he is running a bakery business group in the name and style “VAZHAT BAKERY AND RESTAURANT”. The de facto complainant in Crime Number 649/2021 of Thaliparamba Police Station is an investor in the petitioner’s business. The petitioner faced major setback in his business in 2020 and thus could not share the profit with the de facto complainant in Crime Number 649/2021 as per the contract. To pressurize the petitioner, a false complaint was made against him and thus, the Thaliparamba Police registered Crime Number 649/2021 against the petitioner. The petitioner firmly believes that the present crime was also registered upon the instigation of the de facto complainant in Crime Number 649/2021 as part of pressure tactics. The

¶31

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 4

¶32

allegations against the petitioner in the above crime are baseless and unbelievable. The intention of registering false cases against the petitioner is to keep him behind bars somehow and force him to act according to the wish of his adversary.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶34

petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶35

The learned Public Prosecutor upon

¶36

instructions submitted that as per the prosecution allegation the petitioner agreed to purchase the property of the defacto complainant for an amount of

¶37

Rs.2.2 Crores and after that, the petitioner obtained an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- from the

¶38

defacto complainant and the amount was never returned back and further that the petitioner after forging the seal and slip of Canara Bank sent the same to the defacto complainant to show that he has returned back an amount of Rs.5 lakhs through bank transfer and thereby cheated the defacto complainant.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner

¶40

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 5

¶41

further submitted that the present complaint was registered on the basis of a private complaint. It is also submitted that a 'not to arrest' order was

¶42

issued in this case, and the same is still in force.

¶43

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and nature of the allegations and taking into consideration that petitioner has no other criminal antecedents, I am inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner on stringent conditions. The above bail application is allowed with the following directions. The petitioner shall

¶44

surrender before the investigating officer on 29.08.2022 and make himself available for

¶45

interrogation on that day or on any other day or days as directed by the investigating officer. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.246 of 2022 of Vatakara Police Station, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on

¶46

the same day and be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶47

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for

¶48

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 6

¶49

sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶50

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.246/2022 of Vatakara Police Station as and when summoned to do so;

¶51

(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever so required;

¶52

(iv) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence;

¶53

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶54

(vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶55

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated,

¶56

the Investigating Officer in Crime No.246/2022 of Vatakara Police Station, may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of

¶57

B.A. No. 2821 of 2022 7

¶58

bail.

¶59

It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioner even when the petitioner is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663) .

¶60

sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM,JUDGE

¶61

Biju Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Kumar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satheesh Kumar M.S Vs State of Kerala

Noushad P S Vs State of Kerala

Roshan Jacob Oommen Vs State of Kerala

Kamal Raj Manickath Vs State of Kerala

Anuraj Vs State of Kerala

Jomon T Varghese Vs State of Kerala