Kerala High Court
Pradeep vs State Of Kerala on 7 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 15TH ASWINA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 6391 OF 2022
Crime No.570/2017 of Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod District,
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
PRADEEP
AGED 39 YEARS
SON OF BHASKARA POOJARI, RESIDING AT 1-192, ARANTHADY,
BALEPURI, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA
DISTRICT ,STATE OF KARNATAKA, PIN - 574152
BY ADVS.
T.MADHU
C.R.SARADAMANI
SHAHID AZEEZ
RESHMA SANTHOSH
RENJISH S. MENON
RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
MANJESWAR POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671323
OTHER PRESENT:
PP - SRI. M.C.ASHI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6391 OF 2022
2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
BA No.6391 of 2022
th
Dated this the 7 day of October 2022
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime
No.570/2017 of Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod District,
alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 406,
409 and 420 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution allegation is that, the accused while
working as the Secretary of Mangalpadi-Paivalike Urban
Cooperative Society for the period from 18/11/2016,
misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,63,33,451/- by committing
forgery in the documents, thereby the accused has committed
the abovesaid offences.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime and
further submitted that this is a crime registered in the year
BAIL APPL. NO. 6391 OF 2022
2017 and his custodial interrogation is not required for the
purpose of the investigation.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions
submitted that the investigation is going on and further
submitted that he is a native of Karnataka and his presence
cannot be procured at the time of trial, if he is released on
bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he
is ready to furnish the local surety.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In the result, this
application is allowed. Petitioner shall surrender before the
investigating officer in Crime No.570/2017 of Manjeswar Police
Station, Kasaragod District, on 12.10.2022 at 11 am and make
himself available for interrogation on that day or any other
day/s as directed by the investigating officer. It is directed
that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime
No.570/2017 of Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod District,
he shall be produced before the Jurisdictional Court on the
same day and he shall be released on bail subject to the
BAIL APPL. NO. 6391 OF 2022
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand
only) with two solvent sureties each for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional
Court. One of the surety shall be native of
Kerala.
(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the
investigating officer in Crime No.570/2017 of
Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod District,
as and when called for,
(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to
influence the defacto complainant or interfere
with the investigation or to influence or
intimidate any witness in Crime No.570/2017
of Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod
District,
(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any
other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
BAIL APPL. NO. 6391 OF 2022
investigating officer in Crime No.570/2017 of Manjeswar Police
Station, Kasaragod District, may file an application before the
jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that it is within the power of the police
to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries
on the information if any given by the petitioner even when
the petitioner is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex
Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi)
and another (2020 (1) KHC 663).
sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE
R.AV
