Allowed

Babu Varghese v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jul 2023Bail Appl./1983/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an application for anticipatory bail filed by the second accused in a cheating case involving a forged sale agreement and transfer of a BMW car, granting bail upon surrender for limited custody and strict compliance with investigative conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Petitioner ordered to surrender for limited custody, release on bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, and appear weekly for investigation.

Babu Varghese 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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 1983 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.162 OF 2023 OF NARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

BABU VARGHESE
AGED 67 YEARS
S/O VARGHESE, KEEPPADIYIL HOUSE, VELLOORKUNNAM, MARKET
P.O., MOOVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 686673
BY ADVS.

¶9

T.S.HARIKUMAR
P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

ADV SREEJA V -SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

BAIL APPL. NO. 1983 OF 2023

¶16

¶17

ZIYAD RAHMAN, A.A, J

¶18

Dated this the 13rd day of July, 2023

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶21

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.162 of

¶22

2023 of Narakkal Police Station, Ernakulam District. The said crime was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 420, 465, 468, 473 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

The prosecution case is that, the petitioner herein is the registered owner of BMW Car with Registration No.KL-39F1119. The accused Nos.1 and 3, on the basis of a forged sale agreement transferred the said car to the defacto complainant, after collecting an amount of Rs.12,75,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner complainant filed a criminal case against the first accused and the defacto complainant and got the car from the complainant.

¶24

The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the

¶25

BAIL APPL. NO. 1983 OF 2023

¶26

¶27

investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted in such circumstances.

¶28

Heard Sri.Harikumar the learned counsel appearing

¶29

for the petitioners and Smt.Sreeja V, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations.

¶31

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said application.

¶32

I have carefully gone through the records. It is discernible from the records that at the instance of the petitioner another crime was registered by the North Paravur Police Station as Crime No.245/2023, against the first accused and the defacto complainant, for attempting to transfer the vehicle. The specific case of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that this is a false case got registered by the defacto complainant. After perusing the entire materials, I am of the view that, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner

¶33

may not be necessary. Limited custody for the purpose of interrogation would serve the ends of justice.

¶34

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 1983 OF 2023

¶36

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

¶37

i) The petitioner shall surrender before the

¶38

Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself/herself to interrogation.

¶39

ii) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶40

iii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting himself/herself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

¶41

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until the filing of the final report.

¶42

v) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶43

vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar

¶44

¶45

BAIL APPL. NO. 1983 OF 2023

¶46

nature while on bail.

¶47

vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

¶48

viii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶49

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶50

sd/-

¶51

ZIYAD RAHMAN, A.A, JUDGE

¶52

R.AV

Babu Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Varghese 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

David Gishin.C.M. Vs State of Kerala

Laiju Vs State of Kerala

Kuriyan John Vs State of Kerala

G.R. Neethu Vs State of Kerala

Nobel Lopez. B @ Nobel Nobert Vs State of Kerala

Amal E Vs State of Kerala