High CourtsSingle Bench

Sindhukumari R vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 11 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 KL CK 0055

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr Kauser Edappagath, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 406, 420
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 9660 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

27 paragraphs · 510 words

Dr Kauser Edappagath, J

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the 2nd accused in Crime No.1014/2021 of Koduman Police Station, Pathanamthitta.

2.

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420 and 406 IPC.

3.

The prosecution case in short is that the de facto complainant pledged gold ornaments and availed gold loan from the Annes Bankers which was

conducted by the 1st accused along with the petitioner and even though the entire amount with interest was repaid, the gold was not returned and thus

cheated the de facto complainant.

4.

Heard both sides and perused the case diary.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. He

further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence she is entitled to get bail. The learned Public

Prosecutor opposed the bail application. He contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and

if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6.

A perusal of the report would show that the petitioner is the wife of the 1st accused. In fact she was an employee in the Annes Bankers which was

owned by the 1st accused. Subsequently, she married the 1st accused. The petitioner has no direct involvement in the running of the bank. There is no

specific allegation against the petitioner. The 1st petitioner was already arrested and he is now in judicial custody.

7.

Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary. The petitioner

is a woman and she does not have other criminal antecedents. For all these reasons, the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail on conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of her arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent

sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of discovery, if

any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Saturday until further orders. The petitioner

shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

 (v) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try

to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.