P.S.Nitheesh vs State Of Kerala

Shircy V, J

Application for regular bail.

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1315/2021 of Ollur Police Station, Thrissur District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, has moved this application for his release on bail.

The petitioner has been in custody since 28.08.2021.

The prosecution allegation is that the defacto complainant had borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from this petitioner offering his car bearing Reg.No.KL-08-BE-3333 as security. Thereafter the 1st accused without the consent or knowledge of him had illegally sold and received money and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations levelled against him are absolutely false and baseless. In fact, the defacto complainant had sold the vehicle to a firm by name Car Club and received a sum of Rs.11,51,000/- and filed this case without any bonafides and so he is entitled to be released on bail. In fact he is undergoing unnecessary incarceration for the offence committed by the defacto complainant.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and contended that the investigation of the case is only in progress.

The defacto complainant, who is impleaded as the 2nd respondent has admitted that a sum of Rs.11,51,000/- had been received from Car Club as he entered into an agreement for sale of his car with the said firm. Car Club has purchased the vehicle for Rs.16,20,000/- and paid the entire amount to the defacto complainant and in the agreement it was specifically stated that the vehicle as well as the key of the vehicle are with the 1st accused. (Annexure R2(1)), since it was informed by the defacto complainant that the vehicle and spare key are with the 1st accused. Car Club has also entered into an agreement with the 1st accused and paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- and promised to pay the balance amount of Rs.69,000/- at the time of receipt of the original R.C. book as well as the spare key from him.

It is interesting to note that a loan was received by the defacto complainant for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- after pledging his Benz car without executing any agreement. Thereafter, 1st accused had sold the vehicle to this petitioner. But the sale consideration fixed/received by the 1st accused from this petitioner is not reveled from the prosecution records. But it could be seen that the defacto complainant by that time entered into an agreement with the above referred firm i.e. Car Club and fixed the value of the car as Rs.16,20,000/- and received Rs.11,51,000/- and the balance amount of 4,69,000/- was agreed to be paid to 1st accused by Car Club. A complicated issue has been revealed from the prosecution records as a crucial aspect regarding the consideration alleged to have been received by the 1st accused from this petitioner is missing. So whether any amount has actually been received by the 1st accused from this petitioner and if so what is the amount, is not revealed from the records as such available before me. But the agreement entered between the defacto complainant and the firm, Car Club shows that there was a direct transaction between the two parties with respect to the sale of the car, which was in the possession of the 1st accused. Moreover, prima facie it appears that as agreed by the defacto complainant the Car Club decided to transfer a sum of Rs.4,69,000/- to the 1st accused. Whatever be the transaction between the parties, right now the car has been seized by the police and petitions are pending before the Magistrate Court.

The nature of the accusation, the period of detention undergone by the petitioner in custody, the present stage of investigation, etc. would show that further detention of this petitioner is not required to proceed with the investigation of the case. Taking into consideration of the entire facts involved in this case, I am inclined to release him on bail subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on 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.