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
16 paragraphs · 669 wordsC.S.Dias, J
The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in Crime No.72/2023 of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam, registered against the petitioner to have committed the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner was arrested on 27.11.2023.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that: the accused with an intention to cheat the de facto complainant had induced her and obtained Rs.2,00,001/- during the period from 04.11.2022 to 21.02.2023, promising to secure the de facto complainant a job Visa in Malaysia. The accused has also cheated other witnesses and dishonestly obtained Rs.8,00,001/-. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences.
Heard; Sri. Shyam Kumar M.P., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C. S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusation levelled against him. He has been in incarceration since 27.11.2023. The investigation of the case is complete. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed.
The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the investigation in the case is almost complete. The petitioner has cheated the de facto complainant and three others by obtaining an amount of Rs.8,00,001/-. If at all the petitioner is released on bail, stringent conditions may be imposed on him.
On a consideration of the materials placed on record, and taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.11.2023 and the investigation in the case is practically complete and the petitioner’s further detention in the judicial custody is not necessary, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, one of them shall be a native of the State of Kerala, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;
(ii)The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;
(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;
(v) The petitioner shall furnish his present address and permanent address, and his mobile phone number to the court below and the Investigating Officer;
(vi) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned 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.
(vii)Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.
(viii)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 petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and Anr.[2020 (1) KHC 663].
