Nandakumar vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 18554 Ker

BAIL APPL. NO. 5951 OF 2021            1




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
   WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 17TH BHADRA, 1943
                      BAIL APPL. NO. 5951 OF 2021
     AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 3105/2021 OF JUDICIAL
            MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR
    (CRIME NO.478 OF 2021 OF GURUVAYUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION,
                                  THRISSUR)
APPLICANT/ACCUSED

            NANDAKUMAR
            AGED 56 YEARS
             S/O RAMAN MOOSAD, KRISHNAKRIPA HOUSE, KOTTEPADY,
            POOKODE, THRISSUR
            BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

            STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM- 682031

OTHER PRESENT:

            SRI. MANU.P.G - SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR



     THIS   BAIL    APPLICATION    HAVING     COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
08.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 5951 OF 2021            2




                                 ORDER

Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 478 of 2021 of

Guruvayur Temple Police Station registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 403, 406, 409, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C.

3. He has been in custody since 21.07.2021.

4. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

The petitioner is an employee of Punjab National Bank,

Guruvayur Branch. The bank has deputed him to collect the amount from

the temple offered by the devotees which include silver and gold items

during the period from 2019 to June 2021 and deposit in the bank in the

account of the temple. He used to collect the same for the purpose of

depositing the entire things thus entrusted by the officials of the temple.

But he misappropriated certain amount by forging documents. He

misappropriated in total a sum of Rs.27,51,400/- during the relevant

period apart from the gold and silver items and cheated the bank and

the temple authorities. Thus he has been booked for the aforesaid

offences.

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

Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a plea of false

implication and pointed out that all documents are available in the bank

which has already been seized by the investigating agency and therefore

his further detention in jail is not at all required for the investigating

agency to proceed with the case.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted that the

investigation of the case is well in progress.

8. A perusal of the materials produced before me would show that

the bank deposited the money alleged to have been misappropriated by

the petitioner in the account of the temple taking up the responsibility of

the petitioner as the employee of the said bank, deputed to collect the

offerings of the devotees of the Guruvayur temple. As the petitioner has

been in custody for more than one month, I think that further detention

of him may not be required for the investigating agency to complete the

investigation of the case. Moreover the required documents from the

temple as well from the bank had already been seized by the

investigating agency. Such being the case, I think that this petitioner can

be released on bail subject to the following conditions.

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent

sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing, till filing of the final report.

(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

learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance

with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE smm