Muhammed Abdul Basith vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the first accused in Crime No.805/2023 of Vengara Police Station, Malappuram, registered against the accused (two in number) alleging them to have committed the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code,1860. The petitioner was arrested on 06.12.2023.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that: between 22.09.2022 and 29.10.2023, the accused Nos.1 & 2, who are conducting a travel agency, had enticed the de facto complainant and his friends and obtained an amount of Rs.1,10,000/-, on the assurance that they would secure them a Visa to go to Poland; but, they failed to secure the Visa and refused to return the amount. Hence, they have committed the above offence.

Heard; Sri. K. Rakesh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Neema T.V. the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusation levelled against him. Even going by the prosecution case, the allegation is civil in nature. The investigation in the case is practically complete and the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last more than one month. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the investigation is complete and the final report has been laid before the jurisdictional Court. She also submitted that more than Rs.4,40,000/- is due from the accused to their customers. She stated that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. If at all the petitioner is released on bail, stringent conditions may be imposed on him.

After bestowing my anxious consideration of the materials placed on record, and taking note of the fact that the investigation in the case is complete and the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 06.12.2023, I am of the definite view that the petitioner’s continuous detention is not necessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail; but subject to stringent conditions.

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 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) 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.

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.

(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 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].