Allowed

Sreekumar.S, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Jun 2023Bail Appl./2093/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application allowed for the second accused charged with cheating and criminal breach of trust. Court held custodial interrogation unnecessary and granted bail subject to strict conditions including surrender for interrogation, release on bond after interrogation, regular appearances, and restrictions on travel and contact with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions: surrender for interrogation within two weeks, release on bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two sureties post-interrogation, regular appearances, and restrictions

Sreekumar.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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. MONDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 2093 OF 2023

¶4

CRIME NO.1712/2022 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION

¶5

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶6

SREEKUMAR.S, AGED 56 YEARS S/O SREEDHARAN NAIR, AMBILI BHAVAN, KURIYODU, CHADAYAMANGALAM P.O, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 691534 BY ADVS. ALEXANDER GEORGE SOUMYA FRANCIS

¶7

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶8

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

¶9

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 691534

¶10

3 ANITHA SURESH (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT), AGED 52 YEARS D/O SHIVANANDAN, NETTETHARA,KURIYODE, CHADAYAMANGALAM P.O, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 691534

¶11

ADV SEETHA S- SR PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.2093/2023

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 26^th day of June, 2023

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶18

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in crime No.1712/2022 of Chadayamangalam Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid crime was registered based on the complaint submitted by the 3^rd respondent herein.

¶19

The prosecution case is that, the petitioner, while working as the Manager of M/s. Kechery Enterprises, which was a proprietary concern of the 1^st accused, persuaded the defacto complainant to make a Fixed Deposit amount of 13,75,000/- by promising her to pay interest at the rate of 15% per annum. In addition to that, a further sum of 10,00,000/- was also obtained as Chitty amount. Later, they did not refund the said amount and the interest was not also paid. The crime was registered in such circumstances, and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in

¶20

B.A.No.2093/2023

¶21

: 3 :

¶22

connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail was submitted.

¶23

Heard Sri. Alexander George, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. According to him, the petitioner is a Manager and was only a paid employee who was not having any decisive role in the matter of management of the deposit made to the aforesaid establishment. The decisions regarding the same were being taken by the 1^st accused. It is pointed out that, the petitioner resigned from the establishment on 30.04.2022. It is the further case of the petitioner that he himself is the victim of the fraud committed by the 1^st petitioner as he claimed to have deposited an amount of `8,36,500/- in the said establishment and Annexures 4 to 7 were relied on to substantiate the same. The learned counsel further points out that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

¶25

B.A.No.2093/2023

¶26

: 4 :

¶27

The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, would oppose the aforesaid application by pointing out that the matter is under investigation. It is also pointed out that, altogether, 25 cases have been registered against the petitioner and the other accused, with similar allegations, and the investigation is now in progress. Therefore, the dismissal of the bail application was sought.

¶28

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions raised from both sides. The specific contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner is with respect to the limited role, the petitioner was having in the management of the funds procured by the establishment. He relies on Annexure2 communication, by which he resigned from the Company on 30.04.2022. After going through the materials placed before me, I am of the view that the contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be simply brushed aside. The petitioner is admittedly a paid employee of the said establishment. The specific contention of the petitioner is that the crucial decisions with regard to the management of the funds of the establishment were being taken by the 1^st accused, who is

¶29

B.A.No.2093/2023

¶30

: 5 :

¶31

already under judicial detention. Besides the same, as per order dated 16.06.2023, in B.A. No.2342/2023, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in another crime with similar allegations. When all the aforesaid aspects are taken into consideration, I am of the view that interest of justice would be served, if the cooperation of the petitioner with the investigation is ensured. In the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner appears to be not necessary.

¶32

In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:

¶33

(1) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself to interrogation.

¶34

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

¶35

(3) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

¶36

(4) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every

¶37

B.A.No.2093/2023

¶38

: 6 :

¶39

Saturday until the filing of the final report.

¶40

(5) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶41

(6) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

¶42

(7) 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.

¶43

(8) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶44

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶45

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

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

B.A.No.2093/2023

: 7 :

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2093/2023

¶52

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶53

Annexure	No.1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1712/2022 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM
Annexure	No.2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESIGNATION LETTER DATED 30.4.2022
Annexure	No.3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE JOINTLY PREPARED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE NEW BRANCH MANAGER AND MANAGING DIRECTOR ON 30.4.2022
Annexure	No.4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS RECEIPT DATED 27.3.2019 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER
Annexure	No,5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS RECEIPT DATED 31.1.2020 ISSUED FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER
Annexure	No.6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS RECEIPT DATED 27.1.2021 ISSUED FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,36,500/- IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER
Annexure	No.7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS RECEIPT DATED 13.3.2019 ISSUED FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER'S WIFE PRASEETHA
Annexure	No.8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FI STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 1899/2022 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE REGISTERED AGAINST THE FIRST AND SECOND ACCUSED ON 16.12.2022
Annexure	No.9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN BA NO. 32 /2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ON 6/1/2023

Sreekumar.S, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekumar.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

Shyamlal V.S Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Panattu Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Haneefa Vs State of Kerala

Habeebulla, Vs State of Kerala

Naser Peral Abdulla Moosa Vs the Inspector of Police

Ibrahim Khalil M Vs State of Kerala