Kerala High Court
Sanu N.Nair vs State Of Kerala on 20 September, 2021
BAIL APPL. NO. 5874 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 29TH BHADRA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 5874 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 1746/2021 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA
(CRIME NO.476 OF 2021 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA)
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED
SANU N.NAIR
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.NARENDRAN NAIR, MALAYIL HOUSE, KARAKKADMURI,
MULAKUZHA, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
K.MOHANAKANNAN
T.V.NEEMA
RESPONDENT/STATE
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
ADDL. R2 ANIL KUMAR
AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, CHAITHANYAM, KOTTA
P.O, KIDANGANNUR, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST.
BY ADV K.V.ANIL KUMAR
SRI.MANU.P.G PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 5874 OF 2021 2
ORDER
Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure.
2. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No. 476 of 2021
of Chengannur Police Station registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 484, 419, 465, 468, 473 and 420 r/w. 34 of the India
Penal Code.
3. He has been in custody since 16.07.2021.
4. The allegation is that this petitioner along with the other
accused had approached the defacto complainant with the intention to
deceive him by offering a job to his son in Food Corporation of India
as clerk and received a sum of Rs.20 lakhs and thereafter forged
certain documents and also issued a fake appointment order. On the
basis of the fake appointment order, his son proceeded to Chennai
believing that he could join duty in FCI. But when he reached there it
was realized that he was cheated by this petitioner and other accused
and thereby he committed the aforesaid offences along with the other
accused.
5. This crime has been registered against this petitioner and the
other accused on the basis of the complaint lodged by the defacto
complainant.
6. Prima facie it appears that this petitioner as well the other
accused have received a sum of Rs.20 lakhs from the defacto
complainant promising to provide job for his son. They have not only
received the amount by cheating the defacto complainant but also
fabricated documents as if he has been appointed as a clerk in Food
Corporation of India.
7. No doubt the gravity of the offences alleged against this
petitioner as well the other accused are grave and serious in nature.
Considering the seriousness of the offences committed he is not
entitled to be released on bail, but till date the investigation has not
been completed by the investigating agency. Right to default bail is an
indefeasible right. Hence, this petitioner is entitled for statutory bail
and so he 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.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs 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 jurisdictional court is at liberty to cancel the bail in
accordance with the law.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
JUDGE
smm
