Kerala High Court
Latha vs State Of Kerala on 16 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 27TH MAGHA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 484 OF 2022
CRIME NO.990/2016 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 3167/2021 OF ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - V, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM / II
ADDITIONAL MACT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
LATHA
AGED 51 YEARS
W/O. POONTHANAM, KRISHNAKRIPA, NEAR CHAVADIVILAKOM,
KOONTHALLOOR, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695
304
BY ADV M.R.SARIN
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 306
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. T.R. RENJITH (SR.PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.02.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.484/2022 2
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail
2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.990/2016 of
Kadakkavoor Police Station alleging commission of offences under Sections
324, 306, 420 & 463 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner
together with the 1st accused in the case had fraudulently and dishonestly
induced one Usha Kumari (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) to obtain
loans from financial institutions by mortgaging her property and pledging her
gold ornaments and had misused the amounts received, as a result of which
the financial institution in question had initiated proceedings against the
deceased. It is submitted that the fraudulent activities of the petitioner
together with the 1st accused (husband of the petitioner) who was himself an
employee of a Co-operate bank had driven the deceased to suicide.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
though the crime was registered in the year 2016 and despite the fact that the
case had been investigated by 5 different investigating officers in the Crime
Branch, the petitioner had not been arrayed as an accused in the matter. It is
submitted that even assuming that the allegations against the 1st accused are
correct, the petitioner had no role whatsoever in the matter. It is submitted
that the petitioner had not obtained any benefit from the loans allegedly
availed using the valuables of the deceased by the 1 st accused. It is submitted
that the 1st accused was already arrested and released on bail and the custody
of the petitioner is absolutely not necessary for the purposes of any
investigation.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of
bail. It is submitted that the deceased was a married lady, whose husband
was living and working abroad. It is submitted that, without the knowledge
of the husband of the deceased, the petitioner together with the 1 st accused
had compelled the deceased to execute various documents, using which they
availed loans and other benefits from financial institutions and thereby they
cheated the deceased. It is submitted that when all the fraud came to light,
the deceased was compelled to commit suicide. It is submitted that the
custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely essential in the matter.
It is also submitted that the deceased was allegedly assaulted by accused 1 and
2 on the day previous to her death.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the nature of the allegations, I am not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner as her custodial interrogation may be
absolutely necessary to bring out the truth of the matter. In the result, this
bail application will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
acd
