Allowed

Jayan T S v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jul 2023Bail Appl./1877/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kerala High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail to petitioner Jayan T. S. in a cheating case. The court held that custodial interrogation is not required given the nature of the dispute and the parties’ relationship, enlarging the petitioner on bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal and sureties bond with conditions for surrender and cooperation in investigation.

Jayan T S Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 29TH ASHADHA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 1877 OF 2021

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

JAYAN T S
AGED 42 YEARS
JAYAN.T.S, AGED 42, S/O.LATE SUKUMARAN, THONIYOLI,
VECHOOCHIRA P.O, KOOTHATTUKULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT-686511
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 686511
BY ADV V.PHILIP MATHEW

¶6

RESPONDENT:

¶7

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

¶8

OTHER PRESENT:

¶9

SR PP P G MANU

¶10

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

B.A. No. 1877 of 2021

¶12

..2..

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

Dated this the 20^th day of July, 2023

¶15

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the sole

¶16

accused in Crime No. 25 of 2021 of Ranni Police Station.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant materials form part of the case diary produced by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶18

The case of the prosecution is that while the de facto complainant along with the accused were living together believing the offer given by the accused to marry the de facto complainant, in between 25.09.2009 to 28.11.2017, the accused obtained money from the de facto complainant with offer to purchase five cents of property along with a building in her name and for the purpose of purchasing scooter and autorickshaw for the accused. The further allegation is that even though the accused borrowed Rs.10,00,000/- on the said counts he did not

¶19

B.A. No. 1877 of 2021

¶20

..3..

¶21

repay the amount and thereby the de facto complainant was cheated. The further allegation is that the amount was transferred personally as well as through a bank account.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and if at all the allegation borrowing of money is established, the same would not constitute an offence under Section 420 of the IPC.

¶23

Thereafter, the learned public Prosecutor place the report of the Investigating Officer and also the statement of the de facto complainant reiterating the allegations in tune with the prosecution case.

¶24

On perusal of the available records, it is discernible that money transaction during the period from 2009 to 2017, between the de facto complainant and the accused, they were admittedly to be living together, on the offer of marriage, is the crux of the dispute. Therefore, the investigation is possible even without

¶25

B.A. No. 1877 of 2021

¶26

..4..

¶27

custodial interrogation.

¶28

Hence. this petition stands allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on conditions:

¶29

i. The petitioner shall surrender before the

¶30

Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioner and record his statement, if necessary. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioner before the Jurisdictional Court on the date of arrest itself.

¶31

ii. On such production, Jurisdictional Court shall

¶32

release the petitioner on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each, by himself and by two sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶33

iii. The petitioner shall co-operate with

¶34

B.A. No. 1877 of 2021

¶35

..5..

¶36

investigation and shall be made available for

¶37

interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so.

¶38

iv. The petitioner, shall not, intimidate the

¶39

witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

¶40

v. The petitioner shall not commit any offence

¶41

during currency of this bail and any such involvement

¶42

is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶45

RMV

Jayan T S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayan T S 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asoka Kumar v Vs State of Kerala

T.T Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Mr.Akhil Krishna @ Sambhu Vs State of Kerala

Suresh P Thankappan Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Harris Vs State of Kerala

Saiju Mon Vs State of Kerala