Kerala High Court
Lazar vs State Of Kerala on 15 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 24TH BHADRA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022
CRIME NO.750/2022 OF Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 2 & 4:
1 LAZAR, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.POULOSE @ POULOTH,
PULLOOKKARA HOUSE,CHALAKUDY DESOM,KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY
VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN -
680307.
2 SHERLY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O LAZAR, PULLOOKKARA HOUSE,
CHALAKUDY DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE,CHALAKUDY
TALUK, CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307.
3 JINOOP LAZAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. LAZER
PULLOOKKARA HOUSE, CHALAKUDY DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY
VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY TALUK, CHALAKUDY P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, , PIN - 680307.
BY ADV V.SANDHYA VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE S.I OF POLICE,
CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY P.O., PIN -680 307
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307
3 NIXON VERGHESE, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. VERGHESE,
PULLOKKARAN HOUSE, CHOWKA DESOM, ELINJIPRA VILLAGE,
ELINJIPRA P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, , PIN - 680721
BY ADVS.
Prabhu K.N
MANUMON A.(K/000280/2003)
JAYAN KUTTICHAKKU(K/356/2002)
PP SRI.M.C.ASHI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
BA No. 6611 of 2022
th
Dated this the 15 day of September 2022
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in
Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur
District, alleging commission of offences punishable under
Section 420 r/w Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution allegation is that after having agreed
to sell the property in the ownership of accused No.1 & 2 and
obtained an amount of Rs.1 Crore 73 Lakhs as advance, failed
to register the sale deed and also failed to return the advance
amount and thus defrauded the complainant and when the
amount was asked to be returned, he was threatened over
phone, and thus the accused committed the alleged offence.
4. The case of the petitioners is that first petitioner is
an aged person with serious ailments and now he is worst
affected by stroke and undergoing treatment. Towards the
treatment and other medical expenses, first petitioner had
several financial/loan transactions with respondent No.3. Second
petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner and third petitioner
is their son. At the time of availing financial assistance from
respondent No.3, the first petitioner had to hand over several
signed but blank papers, Stamp papers and Cheques as
security for the loan as insisted by him. Petitioners No.1 and 2,
left with no options, had to hand over those documents as
security to avail the financial assistance/loan in such a pressing
situation, otherwise the medical treatment of the first petitioner
would have been disrupted. The learned counsel for the
petitioners further submitted that the petitioners have been
falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. The case of the
petitioners is that towards the treatment and other medical
expenses, first petitioner had several financial/loan transactions
with respondent No.3 and several documents have been given
as security for the same. The amount could not be returned
back as agreed. Third respondent as an alternative insisted for
assigning the property owned and possessed by the first
petitioner in his name to which the petitioners were not
willing. The further case of the petitioners is that document
was created as Annexure-A1 which is an agreement for sale of
the property. Thereafter, a suit was filed as OS.No.175/2022
before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Irinjalakuda for return of
advance amount on the basis of Annnexure-A1 document and
the third respondent has moved an interim application for
attachment of immovable property as Annexure-A3. A
complaint was also filed, upon which Annexure-A4 crime has
been registered.
5. The application was seriously opposed by the defacto
complainant who appeared through counsel and submitted that
the petitioners have practically admitted the allegations in the
complaint and therefore they are not entitled for a
discretionary remedy from this court.
6. It is seen that petitioners 1 and 2 are aged 65 and
58 respectively and they have no other criminal antecedents.
Considering the nature of the allegations, I feel that custodial
interrogation of the petitioners may not be required for the
purpose of investigation. Petitioners submitted that they are
ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation.
7. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the nature of the allegations and taking into consideration
that the petitioners have no other criminal antecedents, I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In the
result, this application is allowed. Petitioners shall surrender
before the investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of
Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, on 22.09.2022 at 11
am and make available themselves for interrogation. It is
directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners in Crime
No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, they
shall be produced before the Jurisdictional Court on the same
day and shall be released on bail subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) The petitioners 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,
(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the
investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of
Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, as
and when called for,
(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to
influence the defacto complainant or interfere
with the investigation or to influence or
intimidate any witness in Crime No.750/2022
of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District,
(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any
other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy
Police Station, Thirssur 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 petitioners even when
the petitioners are 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
