Disposed

Philomina P.C, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2024Bail Appl./2921/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest bail application by accused in a cheating and forgery FIR. Having surrendered and completed interrogation pursuant to an interim order, the interim protection was made absolute with conditions including cooperation, non-intimidation of witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission.

What did the court decide?

Interim pre-arrest bail made absolute subject to conditions; further presence not required.

Philomina P.C, Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 2921 OF 2022

¶6

THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 PHILOMINA P.C, AGED 48 YEARS ARRENGATTIL HOUSE, KODASSERY P.O,CHALAKKUDY, PIN - 680721

¶9

2 SOUMYA BABURAJ, AGED 35 YEARS PULLIKKANATH HOUSE,PARIYARAM,CHALAKUDY, PIN - 680721

¶10

BY ADVS. MANSOOR.B.H. SAKEENA BEEGUM

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

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

¶13

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

PP SMT SHYNIMOLE V O

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.03.2024, THE

¶17

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

BAIL APPL. NO.2921 OF 2022

¶19

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for an order of pre-arrest bail.

¶22

The petitioners are the accused in Crime

¶23

No.725/2022 of the Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta registered against them for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 420, 403, 405, 416, 468, 471, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

When the bail application came up for consideration on 06.02.2024, this Court passed an interim order, by directing the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer within one week from the date of order and subject themselves to interrogation.

¶25

Heard; Sri.Mansoor B.H., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that, pursuant to the order dated 06.02.2024, the

¶27

BAIL APPL. NO.2921 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

petitioners surrendered before the Investigating Officer on 05.03.2024 and their interrogation has been completed. The petitioners' further presence is not required. Hence, the interim order can be made absolute, subject to additional conditions. The said submission is recorded.

¶30

Resultantly, the bail application is disposed of by making the interim order dated 06.02.2024 absolute, subject to the following conditions:

¶31

(i) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer and make themselves available for interrogation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer;

¶32

(ii) The petitioners shall not intimidate witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner;

¶33

(iii) The petitioners shall not get involved in any other offence while on bail.

¶34

(iv) The petitioners shall not leave India without the permission of the jurisdictional Court;

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO.2921 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

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

¶38

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall also be filed before the court below.

¶39

(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal

¶40

v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

C.S.DIAS JUDGE

¶43

shg

Philomina P.C, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Philomina P.C, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jose Mon T.v, Vs State of Kerala

Suharath Beevi, Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh a P Vs State of Kerala

Saju J @ Saju Jose, Vs State of Kerala

Ravi Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Salman, Vs State of Kerala