High CourtsSingle Bench

Jiljith V.B. vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 22 October 2021 · Citation: (2021) 10 KL CK 0125

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shircy V, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 420
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Appl. No. 7960 Of 2021
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

13 paragraphs · 470 words

Shircy V., J

1.

Application for regular bail.

2.

The petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.3 in Crime No.954/2021 of Balussery Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has moved this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for his release on bail.

3.

The petitioner has been in custody since 28.09.2021.

4.

The prosecution allegation is that, accused Nos.1 and 2 had taken an Innova car bearing Reg.No.KL-55-Y-0104 owned by the defacto complainant and then sold the same to the 3rd accused for a sum of Rs.40,000/- though the vehicle was worth Rs.7.5 lakhs and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

5.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is only a bonafide purchaser for value and he purchased the vehicle from accused Nos.1 and 2 for reasonable consideration and he has absolutely no connection with the alleged offence committed by accused Nos.1 and 2. But he is undergoing incarceration since the date of his arrest.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that on investigation it was revealed that this petitioner is a man engaged with illegal sale of vehicles outside the state and he was having wide connection with persons engaged with such business and that is the reason why he has purchased the vehicle worth Rs.7.5 lakhs for a meager sum of Rs.40,000/-. But it is fairly admitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that he has no criminal antecedents and the recovery of the vehicle involved had already been effected by the investigating agency.

7.

Since the investigation of the case has progressed considerably and recovery of the vehicle involved had been effected by the investigating agency, custodial interrogation of this petitioner may not be required to proceed with the investigation of the case. Such being the case, considering the period of detention undergone by him in judicial custody, I am inclined to release him on bail subject to the following conditions.

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing.

(iii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise 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.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.