Kerala High Court
Sajeed vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 29TH ASWINA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 2235/2022 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, ALAPPUZHA
(CRIME NO 859 OF 2022 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION )
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2:
1 SAJEED
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O. ALIYARKUTTI,
SAFEER MANZIL, THRIKUNNAPUZHA P.O
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690515.,
2 SARATH KRISHNAN P.S
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. SIVARAMAN,
PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, NANGYARKULANGARA.P.O
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690513.,
BY ADVS.
B.RENJITHKUMAR
T.PRADEEP KUMAR
CLARA SHERIN FRANCIS
RESPONDENT/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 NAVYA D. S
KURUVIKKAL MADAM,
KOTTAMKULANGARA,
PUNNAMADA P.O,
(IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 30/9/2022 IN
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
2
CRL MA 1/2022.)
BY ADVS.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
SIDHARTH A.MENON
OTHER PRESENT:
PP SRI.NOUSHAD K.A
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
3
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
========================
B.A. No. 6030 of 2022
========================
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2022
ORDER
This is an application for pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. Petitioners are the 1st and 2nd accused in Crime No 859 of
2022 of Alappuzha North Police Station, Alappuzha District alleging
offences punishable under Sections 120B, 403, 405, 406, 417 and 420
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. According to the prosecution, the accused totally 4 in
number conspired together to possess the Honda City Car bearing
Registration No. KL 32/P 2563 owned by the defacto complainant on
29.11.2021 for a period of six months, for a lease amount of Rs.
1,90,000/- and after the said period, the accused failed to return the
car and in the meantime, the car was sold to the 4th accused and
thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Smt. Clara Sherin Francis, the learned Counsel for the
petitioners contended that the prosecution allegations are false and
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
the incident as alleged had not occurred. The learned counsel
submitted that the defacto complainant is attempting to convert a civil
dispute into a criminal case for ulterior purpose. It was further
submitted that petitioners are willing to hand over the vehicle
provided the defacto complainant returns the amount of Rs. 1,90,000/-
and other charges due to the petitioners. It was further submitted that
the offences alleged against the petitioners are falsely levelled, for the
purpose of obtaining the vehicle without returning the amount
received by the defacto complainant.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto
complainant contended that, petitioners have committed serious
offence which requires custodial interrogation. It was also submitted
that the agreement allegedly produced as Annexure-A1 is false
document and is manipulated also.
6. Sri. Noushad, K.A, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the grant of bail and contended that, the allegations are serious in
nature and requires custodial interrogation.
7. I have considered the rival contentions.
8. Considering the circumstances arising in the case and also
on an appreciation of the arguments of either Counsel, I am of the
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
view that the limited custody of the petitioners would suffice the
investigation.
9. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
28.10.2022 and shall also produce the vehicle Honda City car bearing
Registration No. KL 32/P 2563 for inspection and subject themselves
to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to
arrest the petitioners, then, they shall be released on bail on their
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each
with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the
Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.
(d) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall she tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while
they are on bail.
(f) Petitioners shall not leave India without the permission of
the Court having jurisdiction.
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the
jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for
cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with
the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
The bail application is allowed as above.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
LU
BAIL APPL. NO. 6030 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 6030/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED
29.11.2021 BETWEEN THE ACCUSED AND DE-
FACTO COMPLAINANT
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE R1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
13/6/2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ALAPPUZHA
NORTH POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE R2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
23/6/2022 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT
POLICE CHIEF, ALAPPUZHA
ANNEXURE R3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT TO THE
COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE
DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF ALAPPUZHA
ANNEXURE R4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATES COURT,
ALAPPUZHA
// True Copy // PA To Judge
