Neethu Raj vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21456 Ker

BAIL APPL. NO. 5637 OF 2021         1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
   FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                  BAIL APPL. NO. 5637 OF 2021
 CRIME NO.713/2021 OF Muvattupuzha Police Station, Ernakulam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED

           NEETHU RAJ
           AGED 32 YEARS
           W/O SHINU RESIDING AT PARAKKAL HOUSE, PUTHUPPADY
           P.O.PUTHUPPADY, MULAVOOR KAVALA, MUVATUPUZHA,
           ERNAKULAM-686 673.
           BY ADV SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL


RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT

    1      STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
    2      THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
           MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686
           661.
 ADDL.R3    THE SECRETARY,
           MUVATTUPUZHA CHERUKIDA VYAPARI CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
           LTD NO.E 1289, ARYANKALA COMPLEX, NEW BAZAR, MARKET
           P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA-686661.

           IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 07/09/2021 IN CRL.MA
           NO.1/2021.

     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 5637 OF 2021              2




                                 ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.713 of 2021

of Muvattupuzha Police Station registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 405 and 408 of the Indian Penal Code,

this petitioner has moved this application under Section 438 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The prosecution case is that while the petitioner was

working as an employee in Muvattupuzha Cherukita Vyapari Co-

operative Society she has misappropriated a sum of Rs.4,97,100/-

by misusing her official status in the society and thereby committed

the aforesaid offences.

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

learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner is that she was working as an attender in the society. On

01.12.2016 in order to secure her job, she had to deposit a sum of

Rs.5 lakhs in the society in the name of her husband. Since then she

was working there. Then all on a sudden, on one fine morning, ie;

on 03.09.2018 she was suspended from the service without

assigning any reason. But there was no response to her submission

that she has not committed any offence and she was also not

reinstated, so she was forced to approach the Arbitration Court with

a case (Arbitration Case No.27/2019) to cancel her suspension and

to reinstate her. As there was delay in disposal of the case she filed

W.P(C)No.8612 of 2019 and obtained an order from this Court

directing the Arbitration Court to dispose of her case within 8

months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The writ

petition was disposed of by this court on 05.04.2019. While the writ

petition was pending, she was served with a notice directing to remit

Rs.4,50,000/- before the society. She did not respond to the letter.

Later another letter was issued on 16.02.2019 reducing the amount

as Rs.3,39,000/-. Then all on a sudden after disposal of this writ

petition, this crime has been registered at the instance of the office

bearers of the society and thus she has been arraigned as an

accused in the case. In fact she is totally innocent. She was only an

attender. The submission made by the learned counsel for the

petitioner is that she has absolutely no connection with the money

transactions of the society. But the allegation is that she has

misappropriated the amount. Though she is absolutely innocent, she

apprehends arrest and so she was compelled to approach this Court

with this petition.

5. According to the learned Public Prosecutor the investigation

of the case is still in progress and she has not been reinstated, till

date.

6. The petitioner is a lady aged only 34 years. It appears that

she secured the job as an attender by depositing a sum of Rs. 5

lakhs in the society. She was terminated from service on 3.9.2018.

Though in the writ petition this Court has directed to dispose of her

case pending as ARC No.27/2019 as early as on 05.04.2019, till

date it has not been disposed of. Even now the case is pending

before the Arbitration Court.

7. On going through the materials as such available before

me, I could not find any thing on record to convince me that

custodial interrogation of this petitioner is inevitable for an effective

investigation of the case.

Such being the case, I think that pre-arrest bail can be granted

to this petitioner subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each in the event of arrest by the police in connection with the above crime.

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him in writing. He shall co- operate with the investigation of the case.

(iii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

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

In case of violation of any of the above conditions,

the jurisdictional court is empowered to cancel the bail in

accordance with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

smm                                                  JUDGE