Kerala High Court
Geethu Krishna vs State Of Kerala on 28 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:55879
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 6TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
CRIME NO.227/2025 OF PALLIKKATHODE POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2025 IN CRMC NO.881 OF
2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.3 & 4:
1 GEETHU KRISHNA, AGED 24 YEARS
D/O.GIRISH, GOKULAM HOUSE, PALLICKATHODU,
ANIKAD P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686503.
2 SUBHA GIRISH, AGED 49 YEARS
W/O.GIRISH, GOKULAM HOUSE, PALLICKATHODU,
ANIKAD P.O, KOTTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686503.
BY ADVS. SRI.GEO PAUL
SRI.C.R.PRAMOD
SHRI.JACOB GEORGE PALLATH
SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN A.S.
SHRI.C.B.GAUTHAM
SMT.MARIYAM MATHEWS
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PALLICKATHODU POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA., PIN - 682031.
BY SRI. NOUSHAD K. A., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.07.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:55879
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.8583 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 28th day of July, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.227/2025 of
Pallickathodu Police Station, Kottayam District; registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 r/w Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. The prosecution case is that, accused had, after creating a mortgage
over the property having an extent of 36.42 Ares in Block No.48 of
Akalakunnam Village, settled the same in favour of the third accused,
and soon thereafter sold it to accused 1 and 2; who in turn sold the
property to the defacto complainant without redeeming the mortgage
and thereby cheating the defacto complainant and thus committed the
offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned
Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
2025:KER:55879
been falsely arrayed as accused and that they have no involvement in
the alleged crime.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted
that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature and
custodial interrogation is essential.
7. In Sushila Aggarwal and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and
Another [(2020) 5 SCC 1], it was held that while considering whether to
grant anticipatory bail or not, Courts ought to be generally guided by
considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role
attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case. Grant of
anticipatory bail is a matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to be
imposed or not to be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case,
and subject to the discretion of the court.
8. The allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature. Considering
the fact that they suppressed the existence of a mortgage, and sold the
property to accused 1 and 2, who in turn sold it to defacto complainant.
Though the allegations are serious, taking into account the fact that the
first petitioner was only 19 years at the time of executing the sale deed,
and since both of them are women, I am of the view that petitioners can
be released on pre-arrest bail. However, they must subject themselves to
interrogation for completing the investigation.
9. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:
(a) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
2025:KER:55879
08.08.2025 and shall subject themselves to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to
arrest the petitioners, then, they shall be released on bail on each
of them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand
only) 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 they tamper with the evidence;
(e) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while they
are on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, or if any modification
or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall
be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been
granted by this Court.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/29/07/2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 8583 OF 2025
2025:KER:55879
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8583/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 03-07-2025 IN
CRL.M.C. NO. 881/2025 ON THE FILES OF THE
HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM.
