Allowed

Santhosh P.G v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jul 2023Bail Appl./385/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the accused facing charges under Section 409 IPC for misappropriation of funds by a Supplyco outlet in charge, allowing surrender within two weeks after depositing the amount.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to surrender for interrogation within two weeks, execution of bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, cooperation with investigation, and specific restrictions on contact and trav

Santhosh P.G Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 385 OF 2023

¶6

Crime No.1091/2022 of Pudukkadu Police Station

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

SANTHOSH P.G AGED 48 YEARS

¶9

S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY, THALAPPILLY HOUSE, KADALASSERY P.O, VALLACHIRA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680562

¶10

BY ADV MANU ROY

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PUDUKKADU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, PIN - 680301

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

ADV SREEJA V -SR PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶17

05.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A No.385 of 2023

O R D E R

This is an application filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail.

¶22

2 . The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1091/2022 of Pudukkadu Police Station. The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code.

¶23

3 . The prosecution case is that, while working as the outlet-in-charge of the Maveli store outlet at Thrikkur under the Supplyco, he did not remit the daily collection from the outlet for the period from 28.11.2022 to 30.12.2022 and thereby misappropriated an amount of Rs.2,67,047.74/-, and thus committed the offence of criminal breach of trust. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is filed.

¶24

4 . Heard, Sri.Manu Roy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Sreeja.V., the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State.

¶25

5 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. According to him, it

¶26

¶27

B.A No.385 of 2023

¶28

was an omission on the part of the petitioner in depositing the said amounts. It is also pointed out that the petitioner had already deposited the said amount on 09.01.2023 as evidenced by Annexure-A1. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

¶29

6 . On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said application by pointing out that, the repayment was affected after the shortfall was detected by the authorities concerned. The matter is under investigation and therefore dismissal of the application was sought.

¶30

7 . I have gone through the records. It is true that, there are certain allegations against the petitioner. However, it is the fact that the petitioner had already deposited the said amount as evidenced by Annexure A1. The case of the petitioner is that, he used to regularly remit the daily collections with the Federal Bank, but due to an inadvertent omission, he omitted to remit the daily collections during the said period. Anyhow, it is a matter for investigation. Since the amount is already deposited by the petitioner, I am of the view that, the custodial interrogation of the

¶31

¶32

B.A No.385 of 2023

¶33

petitioner may not be necessary. The interest of justice would be served, if the cooperation of the petitioner with the investigation is ensured.

¶34

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with the following conditions:-

¶35

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

¶36

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 sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer

¶37

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

¶38

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.

¶39

¶40

B.A No.385 of 2023

¶41

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

¶42

vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar

¶43

nature while on bail.

¶44

vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact

¶45

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.

¶46

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

¶47

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

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A

JUDGE

rpk

B.A No.385 of 2023

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 385/2023

¶55

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶56

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 09.01.23 OF THE FEDERAL BANK,THRISSUR FOR RS. 2,67,048

Santhosh P.G v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh P.G 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

Sujimon@Saddam Vs State of Kerala

Shihab Vs State of Kerala

T.H.Riyas Vs State of Kerala

Rahul v R Vs State of Kerala

Dinesh Vs State of Kerala

Deepa v. Chacko Vs State of Kerala