Kerala High Court
Nithin @ Sanju vs State Of Kerala on 25 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1943
Bail Appl..No.3219 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 3851/2019 DATED 02-08-2019 OF
DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA
CRIME NO.1474/2019 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
NITHIN @ SANJU,
AGED 32 YEARS,
S/O. SASIDHARAN,
KADEL VADAKKATHIL,
PUTHUPPALLY P.O.,
KAYAMKULAM,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
PIN-690 501.
BY ADV. SRI.M.G.SREEJITH
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
KOCHI-682031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KAYAMAKULAM POLICE STATION,
KAYAMKULAM P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
PIN-690501.
3 ADDL.R3 PONNAMBILY,
AGED 31 YEARS,
W/O.SYAMJITH,
NIRMALYAM HOUSE,
NEAR CHOOLATHERUVU,
MUTHUKULAM VADAKKUM MURI,
MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE,
KARTHIKAPALLI TALUK,
KAYAMKULAM,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690506.
IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08.06.2020 IN
B.A.No.3219 OF 2020
2
CRL.M.A. NO. 1/2020
R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.SIJU
R3 BY ADV. SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SANTHOSH PETER - SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3219 OF 2020
3
ORDER
Dated this the 25th day of March, 2021
APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL
The applicant is the 1st accused in Crime No.1474 of
2019 of Kayamkulam Police Station, Alappuzha, for having
allegedly committed an offence punishable under Section 420
IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:
2. The defacto complainant's husband was dishonestly
induced to pledge 3 cars, belonging to them with the applicant
for a total sum of Rs.4.5 lakhs. Now, the defacto complainant
and her husband are willing to repay the amount. But, their cars
are not being returned. And, therefore, they filed a complaint
before the Police stating that they have been cheated and the
cars have been appropriated and the applicant has wrongfully
gained in the transaction by cheating the defacto complainant
and her husband.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
applicant, the learned counsel appearing for the defacto
B.A.No.3219 OF 2020
complainant as also the learned Public Prosecutor. The matter
was adjourned several times for settling the matter since the
defacto complainant expressed willingness to re-pay the amount
to the applicant. The matter has been pending for some time. I
find that primarily, this is a dispute where the amounts
admittedly due to the applicant on pledging of the cars belonging
to the defacto complainant, a civil dispute between the applicant
and the defacto complainant. Hence, there is no necessity for
any custodial interrogation of the applicant.
4. In the result, the application is allowed and the
applicant is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer
within two weeks. In the event of his arrest, after interrogation
and recovery, if any, he shall be released on bail on the
execution of a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh only),
with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and on following further
conditions:
(i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all
Saturdays between 9.00AM and 12.00 PM for a period of two
months or till filing of the final report whichever is earlier.
(ii) He shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and
B.A.No.3219 OF 2020
tamper with evidence.
(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the
currency of the bail period.
In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail
before the jurisdictional court.
The bail application is allowed.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON
JUDGE
NR/25/03/2021
