Kerala High Court

Abraham N I vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2025

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

                                              2025:KER:4237


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                          PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 30TH POUSHA, 1946

                BAIL APPL. NO. 3977 OF 2024

   CRIME NO.859/2024 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION,

                         ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

    1     ABRAHAM N.I.,
          AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. ISAAC N A,
          NEDUMPILLIL (H) EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
          ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

    2     ISAAC N.A.,
          AGED 73 YEARS, S/O. N I ABRAHAM,
          NEDUMPILLIL (H), EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
          ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

          BY ADVS.
          THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
          JAYARAMAN S.
          ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH
          DHANYA SUNNY
          ANN MILKA GEORGE



RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

          STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
          PIN - 682 031.
                                                          2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :2:
           BY ADV
           NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   20.01.2025,     ALONG    WITH         Bail   Appl..4259/2024   AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                 2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :3:

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 30TH POUSHA, 1946

                  BAIL APPL. NO. 4201 OF 2024

 CRIME NO.327/2024 OF PIRAVAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 4:

     1     K.C., REJI.,
           AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. K.J.,CHAKOCHAN,
           MOOSARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAYAR P.O.,
           KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686 662.

     2     ISAAC N.A.,
           AGED 73 YEARS, S/O. N I ABRAHAM,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H), EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

     3     ABRAHAM N.I.,
           AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. ISAAC N.A.,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H), EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

           BY ADVS.
           THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
           JAYARAMAN S.
           ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH
           ANN MILKA GEORGE
           DHANYA SUNNY
                                                          2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :4:
RESPONDENTS/STATE:

           STATE OF KERALA,
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
           PIN - 682 031.

           BY ADV
           HRITHWIK C.S, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   20.01.2025,     ALONG    WITH         Bail   Appl..4259/2024   AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                 2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :5:


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 30TH POUSHA, 1946

                  BAIL APPL. NO. 4208 OF 2024

 CRIME NO.345/2024 OF PIRAVAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

     1     ABRAHAM N.I,
           AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. ISAAC N.A.,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H), EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

     2     ISAAC N.A.,
           AGED 73 YEARS, S/O. N.I., ABRAHAM,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H), EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

           BY ADVS.
           THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
           JAYARAMAN S.
           ANN MILKA GEORGE
           ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH
           DHANYA SUNNY



RESPONDENT/STATE:

           STATE OF KERALA,
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.
                                                          2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :6:
           BY ADV
           NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   20.01.2025,     ALONG    WITH         Bail   Appl..4259/2024   AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                 2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :7:


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 30TH POUSHA, 1946

                  BAIL APPL. NO. 4259 OF 2024

 CRIME NO.356/2024 OF PIRAVAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 1 & 2:

     1     ABRAHAM N I,
           AGED 43 YEARS, S/O ISAAC N A,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H) EDAYAR P O, KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

     2     ISAAC N A,
           AGED 73 YEARS, S/O N I ABRAHAM,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H) EDAYAR P O, KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

           BY ADVS.
           THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
           JAYARAMAN S.
           ANN MILKA GEORGE
           ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH
           DHANYA SUNNY



RESPONDENTS/STATE:

           STATE OF KERALA,
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
           PIN - 682 031
                                                      2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :8:
           BY ADV
           NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    20.01.2025,      ALONG     WITH      Bail   Appl..3977/2024,
4201/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                 2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :9:


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 30TH POUSHA, 1946

                  BAIL APPL. NO. 4262 OF 2024

 CRIME NO.362/2024 OF PIRAVAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3:

     1     K.C REJI
           AGED 53 YEARS, S/O K.J CHAKOCHAN,
           MOOSARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAYAR P.O,
           KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686 662.

     2     ISAAC N A
           AGED 73 YEARS, S/O N I ABRAHAM,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H) EDAYAR P O, KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

     3     ABRAHAM N I
           AGED 43 YEARS, S/O ISAAC N A,
           NEDUMPILLIL (H) EDAYAR P O, KOOTHATTUKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 686 662.

           BY ADVS.
           THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
           JAYARAMAN S.
           ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH
           DHANYA SUNNY
           ANN MILKA GEORGE
                                                           2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :10:


RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

           STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.

           BY ADV
           HRITHWIK C.S, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   20.01.2025,     ALONG    WITH          Bail   Appl..4259/2024   AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                     2025:KER:4237
B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

                                     :11:


              P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
              --------------------------------
 B.A. Nos. 3977, 4201, 4208, 4259 & 4262 of 2024
               -------------------------------
      Dated this the 20th day of January, 2025


                   COMMON                   ORDER

These Bail Application filed under Section 482 of

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita are connected and

therefore, I am disposing these bail applications by a

common order.

2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime

Nos.327 of 2024, 345 of 2024, 356 of 2024 and 362 of

2024 of Piravam Police Station and also Crime No.859 of

2024 of Muvattupuzha Police Station. The above cases

are registered against the petitioners alleging offences

punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section

34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.

2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

3. The prosecution case is that the

petitioners being the Chairman and the Managing

Director of the Nedumpilli Finance Company Limited with

an intention to cheat and to make unlawful gain from the

defacto complainant received huge amount as deposits

and cheated the defacto complainant without returning

the deposit amounts and the interest. Hence it is alleged

that the accused committed the offence.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the

Public Prosecutor.

5. Counsel appearing for the petitioners

submitted that in several cases the petitioners were

granted bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure

Code and also under Section 438 of the Criminal

Procedure Code. The allegations against the petitioners in

the other cases are also same. The petitioners are ready

to abide any conditions, if this Court grants them bail.

2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

6. Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

7. This Court considered the contentions of

the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that

the allegations against the petitioners are serious. But,

for the same set of facts several cases are registered

against the petitioners and this Court granted bail to the

petitioners in all those case, either Regular Bail or

Anticipatory Bail. Considering the facts and

circumstances of the case, I think the petitioners can be

released on bail after imposing stringent conditions.

8. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle

that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v

Directorate of Enforcement [2019 (16) SCALE 870],

after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that,

the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same

inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the 2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

exception so as to ensure that the accused has the

opportunity of securing fair trial.

9. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v

State of Uttar Pradesh and Another [2021(5)KHC

353] considered the point in detail. The relevant

paragraph of the above judgment is extracted hereunder.

"12. We may note that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. (Joginder Kumar v. State of UP and Others (1994 KHC 189: (1994) 4 SCC 2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

260: 1994 (1) KLT 919: 1994 (2) KLJ 97: AIR 1994 SC 1349: 1994 CriLJ 1981)) If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation we fail to appreciate why there should be a compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused."

10. In Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau

of Investigation [2023 KHC 6961], the Apex Court

observed that even if the allegation is one of grave

economic offence, it is not a rule that bail should be

denied in every case.

Considering the dictum laid down in the above

decision and considering the facts and circumstances of

this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the

following directions:

2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

1. The petitioners shall appear before

the Investigating Officer within two

weeks from today and shall undergo

interrogation.

2. After interrogation, if the

Investigating Officer propose to arrest

the petitioners, they shall be released

on bail on executing a bond for a sum

of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand

only) with two solvent sureties each for

the like sum to the satisfaction of the

arresting officer concerned.

3. The petitioners shall appear before

the Investigating Officer for

interrogation as and when required. The

petitioners shall co-operate with the

investigation and shall not, directly or

indirectly make any inducement, threat 2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

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.

4. Petitioners shall not leave India

without permission of the jurisdictional

Court.

5. Petitioners shall not commit an

offence similar to the offence of which

they are accused, or suspected, of the

commission of which they are

suspected.

6. Needless to mention, it would be well

within the powers of the investigating

officer to investigate the matter and, if

necessary, to effect recoveries on the

information, if any, given by the

petitioners even while the petitioners 2025:KER:4237 B.A No.3977 of 2024 and Conn.Cases

are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v.

State (NCT of Delhi) and another

[2020 (1) KHC 663].

7. If any of the above conditions are

violated by the petitioners, the

jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in

accordance to law, even though the bail

is granted by this Court. The

prosecution and the victim are at liberty

to approach the jurisdictional Court to

cancel the bail, if any of the above

conditions are violated.

Sd/-