High CourtsSingle Bench

T.K Sandya And Ors vs State Of Kerala And Ors

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 KL CK 0362

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 406, 420, 468, 471
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 9079 Of 2020
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

9 paragraphs · 447 words
1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

2.

The applicants are husband and wife, who are accused in Crime No.607/2020 of Kakkur Police Station for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.

3.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the 1st accused was an employee of Kakkoor Service Co-operative Bank. The Korayi Temple Sangam Samithy, represented by the de facto complainant , had deposited an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- in the said Bank. On 29.11.2016 the applicants allegedly misappropriated the said amount by withdrawing the same, without the knowledge of the Treasurer of the Samithy, by forging documents and his signature. During the year 2018 also the applicants had allegedly withdrawn some amount without the knowledge of the Treasurer of the Samithy and thus the applicants have allegedly misappropriated a total sum of Rs.2,69,500/- by forging the signature of the Treasurer.

4.

Whether the offence has been committed by the applicants or not is a matter to be decided on the basis of the expert evidence that is to be adduced by the prosecution regarding the forgery of the signatures. The fact that the applicants were in control of the Bank and they had domain over the amount which had deposited in the Bank, is not in dispute. Therefore, the complicity of the applicants is not in dispute. Whether the applicants had forged the signature of the Treasurer of the Samithy to withdraw the matter without their knowledge is a matter of evidence. The applicants are not likely to flee from justice. They have a permanent residence and the incident took place during the year 2018 and they are still available. Therefore, I find no reason to hold that the applicants may not cooperate with the investigation.

In the result, the bail application is allowed and the applicants are directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of arrest, after interrogation, the applicants shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) each, with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:

(i) They shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

(ii) They shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called and shall cooperate with the investigation; and

(iii) During the bail period, they shall not get involved in any similar offences.

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.