High CourtsSingle Bench

Nitin Pushpan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 19 July 2021 · Citation: (2021) 07 KL CK 0220

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Haripal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 406, 420, 506(1)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Appl. No. 1950 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

21 paragraphs · 389 words

K.Haripal, J

1.

Petitioners are the 7th and 8th accused in Crime No.1481/2019 of Thodupuzha Police Station, which was registered alleging offence punishable

under Sections 420, 406, 506(1) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The allegation is that the petitioners had obtained an amount of Rs.57,50,000/- from the defacto complainant promising to arrange a seat for MBBS

in Al Azar Medical College Thodupuzha. Later, they failed in arranging the seat nor the money was returned. So the daughter of the defacto

complainant had to arrange seat elsewhere. Only an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was returned and the crime was launched in such a contingency.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Public Prosecutor.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they happened to be arrayed as accused for the sole reason that they happened to be partners

of an institution by name Felsted Edu Solutions along with the first accused, who had obtained amount from the defacto complainant. The petitioners

have no connection whatsoever with the money transactions. Therefore, their custodial interrogation is not necessary. Thus they pray for release them

under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the first accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court under Annexure-

III order.

5.

Even going by the prosecution records, the money transaction was between the first accused and the petitioners. Whether the petitioners were

privy to the transaction, by virtue of the fact that they happened to share the management of the said institution can be decided after taking evidence.

In the nature of the allegations, it does not seem that their custodial interrogation is warranted. There is no apprehension that they will flee from

justice.

In the circumstances, the petitioners are at liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and make themselves

available for interrogation; in the event of arrest, they shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) each

with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; they shall co-operate with the investigation, shall not try

to contact or influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence and shall not involve in any crime during the period on bail.

Bail application is allowed as above.