High CourtsSingle Bench

Aneesh vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 November 2022 · Citation: (2022) 11 KL CK 0352

HON’BLE JUDGES
Viju Abraham, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 406, 420
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 9338 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 499 words

Viju Abraham, J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.867 of 2022 of Konni Police Station, Pathanamthitta District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The prosecution allegation is that with an intention to deceive the defacto complainant, the first accused represented himself that he is working as a doctor at Thiruvananthapuram Airport and made the defacto complainant believe that he could arrange job for defacto complainant's daughter at the Airport. As consideration, the defacto complainant was made to transfer an amount of Rs.5 lakhs to the account of the 2nd accused, the wife of the 1st accused, at SBI, Pathanapuram Branch during the period 2019-2020. He was further made to transfer an amount of Rs.26 lakhs on different periods directly to the 1st accused and he thereby received a total amount of Rs.31 lakhs. But they neither arranged the job nor returned the money so far. Further, the defacto complainant was also made to handover his car bearing registration No. KL/03-AE 7065 to the 1st accused and that car was also not returned to the defacto complainant. It is alleged that 3rd accused abetted accused Nos.1 and 2 in committing cheating and criminal breach of trust and thus the accused have committed the abovesaid offences.

4.

Petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated in the abovesaid crime and that he is in custody from 08.10.2022 onwards. Petitioner further submits that the investigation is practically over and his further detention is not required for the purpose of investigation.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for bail mainly contending that the petitioner is involved in another crime of similar nature. Going by the prosecution case it is seen that the amount was transferred during the period 2019-2020 and the complaint was preferred only in 2022.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is in custody from 08.10.2022 onwards, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. In the result, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.867 of 2022 of Konni Police Station, Pathanamthitta District on all Saturdays at 11.00 a.m. until filing of final report.

(iii) He shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence any witness in the abovesaid crime.

(iv) He shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If  any  of  the  aforesaid  conditions  are  violated,  the investigating officer in Crime No.867 of 2022 of Konni Police Station, Pathanamthitta District may file an application before the jurisdictional court, for cancellation of bail.