Sunilkumar vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 23365 Ker

BAIL APPL. NO. 8712 OF 2021             1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
 THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                     BAIL APPL. NO. 8712 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 2324/2021 OF II ADDITIONAL
                       DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM
    (CRIME NO.861 OF 2021 OF KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION)
PETITIONER/ACCUSED 9A1)

             SUNILKUMAR
             AGED 42 YEARS
             S/O.KARUNAKARAN PILLAI, KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, IDUKKI,
             PRESENTLY AT SUB JAIL, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686661.
             BY ADV BABY P. ANTONY


RESPONDENT

             STATE OF KERALA
             REP. BY CBCID, ERNAKULAM REP. BY THE PUBLIC
             PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN -
             682 031.
             BY ADV ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION


OTHER PRESENT:

             C.K.SURESH- SR.PP



     THIS    BAIL   APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
18.11.2021, THE COURT ON 25.11.2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 8712 OF 2021            2




                                 ORDER

Application for regular bail.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.861 of 2021 of

Koothattukulam police station registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 489A, 489A, 489D, 120B read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution allegation is that the 1st accused along with

the other accused pursuant to the criminal conspiracy hatched

between them had taken a rented building and procured a printer

and other machineries/devices for the purpose of making counterfeit

Indian currency notes for using as genuine notes and thereby

committed the aforesaid offences.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the

learned Public Prosecutor.

5. This petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and is

undergoing unnecessary incarceration is the submission of the

learned counsel for the petitioner. But from the report submitted by

the investigating officer it is revealed that in the search conducted by

his team, on getting information, 1510 numbers of counterfeit

currency of denomination of Rs.500/- and the devices and materials

used for making counterfeit currencies were seized and five persons

including the petitioner were caught red handed from the place of

occurrence. The two vehicles found in the premises of the rented

building involved in the crime were also seized by the anti terrorist

squad team.

6. Moreover the bail application is opposed mainly because of

the seriousness of the crime involved and the criminal antecedents of

the petitioner. Heard the rival contentions.

7. A very serious offence which adversely affect the financial

stability of our country has been committed by this petitioner as well

as the other accused. It is revealed that this petitioner and the other

accused are having interstate relations in committing the alleged

offence. Moreover this petitioner is proficient in making counterfeit

currencies and apart from this case, he is involved in six other cases

of similar nature.

8. Though the investigation of the case is over the fact that he

is having criminal antecedents itself would show that if he is released

on bail there is every possibility to repeat similar offence, which

would affect the entire interest of the society, adversely.

Furthermore, dealing with counterfeit currency will reduce the value

of the real money and it will collapse the entire economy of our

country. It is well settled that no straight jacket formula exist to

assess an application for granting or rejecting bail. In Prasanta

Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee and Another [(2010) 14 SCC

496] the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application

for bail was laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows:

"9. ......... It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are:

(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence;

(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation:

(iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;

(iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;

(v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused;

(vi) likeliood of the offence being repeated;

(vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and

(vii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail."

For the reasons indicted above, as the offence committed by

this petitioner appears to be a serious one which affects the financial

stability of our country, I am not inclined to release him on bail.

Hence, dismissed.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V

JUDGE

smm