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
28 paragraphs · 518 wordsGopinath P., J
These are applications for regular bail.
The petitioner in both these bail applications is the same person. BA No. 232 of 2022 arises out of a case registered by the Crime Branch as Crime
No.102/CB/KNR & KSD/2017 while BA No. 250 of 2022 arises out of Crime No.104/CB/KNR & KSD/2017. Crime No.102/CB/KNR &
KSD/2017 was registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Crime
No.104/CB/KNR & KSD/2017 was registered alleging commission of offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation against the petitioner in both cases is that he obtained money from the de facto complainants with the promise of securing admission
for their wards for MBBS in the Amala Medical College or Jubilee Medical College, Thrissur.
The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that while in one
case, the allegation is that the petitioner has procured Rs.5,00,000/- from the de facto complainant, the allegation in the other case is that he had
procured Rs.30,00,000/- from the de facto complainant. It is further submitted that the allegations are totally baseless and there is no evidence to
show payment of any money to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody from 09.12.2021 and the continued detention of
the petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation.
The learned Public Prosecutor opposes grant of bail. It is pointed out that there is sufficient evidence to show that the amounts were given to the
petitioner and the payments were made through bank. It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail considering the allegations
against him.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account of the nature of allegations against the petitioner and also
considering the fact that he has been in custody from 09.12.2021, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted bail, subject to stringent
conditions. I also note that final report in both cases has already been filed against the petitioner.
In the result, these bail applications are allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:
(a) The petitioner shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) in each crime with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to
the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;
(b)Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime Nos.102/CB/KNR & KSD/2017 and 104/CB/KNR & KSD/2017, whenever called upon to do so;
(c) The petitioner shall not attempt to influence or intimidate the de facto complainants or any witness in Crime Nos.102/CB/KNR & KSD/2017 and 104/CB/KNR &
KSD/2017;
(d)The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, the investigating officer in Crime Nos.102/CB/KNR & KSD/2017 and 104/CB/KNR & KSD/2017, may
file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail.