Sunitha vs State Of Kerala Rep By Public Prosecutor

Gopinath P., J

These are applications for regular bail.

These bail applications are filed by one 'Sunitha', who is an accused in Crime Nos.690/2021, 619/2021, 718/2021, 695/2021, 728/2021, 716/2021 and

757/2021 all of which have been registered at the Pattambi Police Station, Palakkad District and also in Crime No.494/2021 registered at the Koppam

Police Station, Palakkad District.

The allegation raised against the petitioner is that she is the Director of a Company known as 'M/s. Janam Nidhi Ltd.' of which her husband is the

Managing Director. It is alleged that huge amounts of money were collected from various persons under the promise that the same would be returned

with interest and thereafter, there was a failure on the part of the Company in returning the amounts to the depositors. It is alleged that thereby the

petitioner along with the other accused in the case committed offences under Sections 406 and 420 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner in all these cases would submit that though the petitioner is a Director in the aforesaid 'Janam Nidhi Ltd'.,

Company, she had no role whatsoever in the day-to-day management of the Company. It is submitted that the petitioner is a house wife, who had no

knowledge whatsoever about the management or day-to-day affairs of the Company. It is submitted that in some other cases registered against the

petitioner, where identical allegations have been raised, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court with a condition that the

petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on a particular date. It is submitted that on account of Covid-19 infection, the petitioner could not

appear on the date fixed by the Sessions Court and extension of time was sought for. Finally, this Court granted extension of time and, in compliance

with the direction issued by this Court, the petitioner had appeared before the investigating officer on 2.2.2022. It is submitted that in respect of the

crimes involved in these batch of cases, the petitioner had filed anticipatory bail applications. However, it is submitted that, when the petitioner

appeared in connection with the direction issued by the Sessions Court (as modified by this Court), the petitioner was arrested and remanded. It is

submitted that the petitioner is a 38 year old woman and that the continued detention of the petitioner is not necessary for the purposes of any

investigation.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that admittedly the petitioner is a Director of the Company in question. It is

submitted that huge amounts of hard earned money of various persons were lost owing to the activities of the Company and the other accused in the

case. It is submitted that the petitioner being a Director of the Company cannot take the plea that she is not involved in the day-to-day management of

the affairs of the Company. It is submitted that the petitioner and her husband together own about 70% of the shares in the Company. It is submitted

that the petitioner is not entitled to be granted bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions

Court in respect of other cases involving identical allegations and considering the fact that the petitioner is a woman, aged 38 years, who has been in

custody since 2.2.2022, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be granted bail subject to conditions. I am convinced that the continued detention of

the petitioner is not necessary for the purposes of investigation.

In the result these bail applications are allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) in each of the cases registered against her (as mentioned above)

with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The Petitioner shall report before the Investigating officer in Crime Nos.690/2021, 619/2021, 718/2021, 695/2021, 728/2021, 716/2021 and 757/2021 of Pattambi Police

Station, Palakkad District and also in Crime No.494/2021 of Koppam Police Station, Palakkad District as and when called upon to do so;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No..690/2021, 619/2021, 718/2021, 695/2021,

728/2021, 716/2021 and 757/2021 of Pattambi Police Station, Palakkad District and also in Crime No.494/2021 of Koppam Police Station, Palakkad District;

(iv)Â The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime Nos.690/2021, 619/2021, 718/2021, 695/2021, 728/2021, 716/2021 and

757/2021 of Pattambi Police Station, Palakkad District or the investigating officer in Crime No.494/2021 of Koppam Police Station, Palakkad District

may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.