Satheeshan 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.1215/2023 of the Kollam East Police Station, Kollam, registered against the accused ( ten in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120 B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 26.12.2023

The gist of the prosecution case is that: the accused, in furtherance of their common intention to cause wrongful loss to the defacto complainant, conspired and made the defacto complainant deposit Rs.38,37,200/- in the bank account of the first accused, promising to pay 12% annual interest. The other accused also made the de facto complainant transfer the substantial amounts to the bank accounts of the other accused. However, the accused failed to pay the de facto complainant interest or return the principle amount. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.Arun Babu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha. S, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusation levelled against him. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 26.12.2023, which is more than a month. The investigation in the case, so far as the petitioner is concerned, is practically complete. The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the Investigating Officer and abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the application. She submitted that only the petitioner and the second accused have been arrested till date. The other accused are still at large. The investigation is in progress. The recovery of the amounts has not been effected. If the petitioner is let off on bail, there is every likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence and influencing the witnesses. Moreover, it would also hamper the investigation, especially when the accused 3 to 10 are yet to be arrested. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

On an anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, taking note of the arguments addressed across the bar, and particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioner was arrested as early as on 26.12.2023, which is more than 34 days, that the investigation in the case, so far as the petitioner is concerned, is practically complete, that merely because the accused 3 to 10 are not arrested, the same cannot be treated as a ground to deny bail to the petitioner, and that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, I am of the view that the petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application, 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, 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 Saturday 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 not leave the territorial jurisdiction of Idukki district except for the purpose of reporting before the Investigating Officer every Saturday.

(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 (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].