Kerala High Court
Abraham Jacob vs State Of Kerala on 23 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 1600 OF 2021
CRIME NO.20/2021 OF VECHOOCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ABRAHAM JACOB
AGED 43 YEARS
S.O. P.O. JACOB, SECRETARY, THE CHETHACKAL SERVICE
COOPERATIVE BANK NO. 3864, R EDAMON RANNY. RESIDING AT
VALIYAMANNIL PADINJARETHIL HOUSE, MAMUKKU P.O.,
PAZHAVANGADI VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689673
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.K.ANAND (A-1921)
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 *ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED
RAJENDRAN PILLAI
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O SIVARAMAN PILLAI, PICHANATTU KANDATHIL HOUSE,
CHETHACKAL VILLAGE, CHETHACKAL P.O,PIN. 689677.
*ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 10/03/2021 IN
CRL.M.A. NO.1/2021.
3 *ADDL R3 TO R6 IMPLEADED
ADDL R3 LEELAMMA N.D,
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O LATE ANIL KUMAR, ANIL BHAVAN, CHETTHACKAL P.O,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN-689677
4 ADDL R4 KRISHNA KUMARI AMMAL
AGED YEARS, W/O GOPINATHA PILLAI C.K. MAYA BHAVAN,
THOMPIKANDAM P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT. PIN-689676
5 ADDL R5 GOPINTHA PILLAI
AGED 70 YEARS
MAYA BHAVAN, THOMPIKANDAM P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN-689676
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 2
6 ADDL R6 GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR
AGED YEARS, S/O LATE. NADAMANGALATHU HOUSE,
CHETTHACKAL P.O, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT. PIN-689677
* ADDL R3 TO R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
28/02/2022 IN CRL.M.A.NO.2/2021
R1 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P G MANU
BY ADV.V.SETHUNATH
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.3.2023, ALONG WITH B.A.NOS.2205 OF 2021 & 4080 OF 2021,
THE COURT ON 23.03.2023, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 2205 OF 2021
CRIME NO.20/2021 OF VECHOOCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SANOJ P KUTTAPPAN
AGED 40 YEARS
PUTHEDATH, VAKATHANAM, R EDAMON, CHETHAKKAL POST,
RANNY, EDAMON
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689676
BY ADV ARUN CHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 RAJENDRAN PILLAI
AGED 62 YEARS
SON OF SIVARAMA PILLAI, PICHANATT KANDATHIL HOUSE,
CHETHAKKAL POST, CHETHAKKAL,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689676
3 *ADDL.R3 TO R6 IMPlEADED
ADDL R3 LEELAMMA N.D,
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O LATE. ANIL KUMAR, ANIL BHAVAN, CHETTHACKAL P.O,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHHITTA DISTRICT. PIN 689677
IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28/02/2022 IN
CRL.M.A.NO.1/2021.
4 ADDL R4 KRISHNA KUMARI AMMAL, AGED YEARS
W/O GOPINATHA PILLAI C.K, MAYA BHAVAN, THOMPIKANDAM
P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT.PIN-689676
5 ADDL.R5 GOPINATHA PILLAI C.K., AGED 70 YEARS
MAYA BHAVAN, THOMPIKANDAM P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY
TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN-689676
6 ADDL.R6 GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 4
AGED YEARS, S/O LATE. NADAMANGALATHU HOUSE,
CHETTHACKAL P.O, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT,PIN-689677
*ADDL R3 TO R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
28/02/2022 IN CRL.M.A.NO.1/2021.
R1 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T V NEEMA
BY ADV.V.SETHUNATH
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.3.2023, ALONG WITH B.A.NOS.1600 OF 2021 & 4080 OF 2021,
THE COURT ON 23.03.2023, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 4080 OF 2021
CRIME NO.20/2021 OF VECHOOCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.3
DIVYA VIJAYAN
AGED 37 YEARS
W/O. SURES P.G., PICHANTTU HOUSE, CHETHAKKAL P.O.,
RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADVS.
P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) (K/421/1984)-25829
P.M.RAFIQ
M.REVIKRISHNAN
VIPIN NARAYAN
AJEESH K.SASI
POOJA PANKAJ
SRUTHY N. BHAT
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 *ADDL R2 IMPLEADED
ADDL.R2 RAJENDRAN PILLAI, AGED 62 YEARS
S/O SIVARAMA PILLAI, PICHANATT KANDATHIL HOUSE,
CHETHAKKAL POST, CHETHAKKAL -689676
ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28/02/2022
IN CRL.MA.NO.1/2021.
3 *ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED
ADDL R3 JOHN MATHEW, AGED 69 YEARS,
S/O THOMAS JOHN, PRESIDENT, THE CHETHAKKAL SERVICE
COPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.3864, R-EDAMON P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE 689676
*ADDL R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28/02/2022
IN CRL.MA.NO.2/2021.
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 6
4 *ADDL.R4 TO R7 IMPLEADED
ADDL R4 LEELAMMA N.D, AGED 53 YEARS
W/O LATE. ANIL KUMAR, ANIL BHAVAN, CHETTHACKAL P.O,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN 689677
5 ADDL.R5 KRISHNA KUMARI AMMAL,
AGED YEARS, W/O GOPINATHA PILLAI C.K, MAYA BHAVAN,
THOMPIKANDAM P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN 689676
6 ADDL.R6 GOPINATHA PILLAI C.K, AGED 70 YEARS
MAYA BHAVAN, THOMPIKANDAM P.O, EDAMURY,RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN 689676
7 ADDL.R7 GOPALAKRUSHNAN NAIR,
AGED YEARS, S/O LATE. NADAMANGALATHU HOUSE,
CHETTHACKAL P.O, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT. PIN 689677
*ADDL.R4 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
28/02/2022 IN CRL.MA.NO.4/2021.
R1 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P G MANU
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.3.2023, ALONG WITH B.A.NOS.1600 OF 2021 & 2205 OF 2021,
THE COURT ON 23.03.2023, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205
& 4080 OF 2021 7
COMMON ORDER
Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2023 B.A.No.1600/2021 is an application for anticipatory bail, filed by the 2nd accused in Crime No.20/2021 of Vechoochira Police Station, Pathanamthitta. Accused No.4 in the above crime, is the petitioner in B.A.No.2205/2021. B.A.No.4080/2021 is at the instance of the 3rd accused in the above crime.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant, to oppose bail.
3. I have perused the contentions of the parties and relevant documents.
4. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, the accused herein committed offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420, 409 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The specific allegation is that, the accused herein misappropriated loan of Rs.20 Lakh, by BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 8 using the credentials and accounts of the de facto complainant, in Chethackal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. The specific allegation is that, by misusing account No.3591, belonged to the de facto complainant, which was meant to grant Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only), towards Agricultural Loan, on 22.5.2020, to the de facto complainant, the accused herein forged documents and used the same as genuine, illegally. Thereby, they secured Rs.20 Lakh in the name of the de facto complainant, after securing the property of one Leelamma, as mortgage, without the knowledge of Leelamma. Thereafter, the above amount was withdrawn by the accused and thereby, misappropriated.
5. On 8.1.2021, the de facto complainant filed complaint before the Vechoochira Police and accordingly, crime was registered, alleging the above said offences.
6. While pressing for grant of bail to the 2 nd accused, who is the Secretary of Edamon Co-operative Bank, the learned counsel for the 2 nd accused would submit that the 2nd accused is innocent and he is the person, who initially lodged complaint on 7.1.2021, BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 9 regarding the occurrence. Instead of registering crime acting on the complaint lodged by the 2 nd accused, the police registered crime, based on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant herein, on the next day. The learned counsel would submit that the de facto complaint in this crime, is the brother of the husband of the 3 rd accused, Smt.Divya. It is also submitted that Divya is the person, who manipulated records and swallowed the entire amount. Accordingly, the Bank initially suspended Divya and thereafter, she was dismissed from service. According to the learned counsel for the 2 nd accused, there is no allegation for the prosecution that the Secretary or any other person, apart from the 3rd accused, misappropriated the amount. In this regard, the learned counsel pointed out an undertaking given by Divya, soon after detection of misappropriation by the Bank. It is also pointed out that, Divya is the person, who swindled off the entire amount and there are other serious allegations also against her. However, in order to extend the liability on the shoulder of the Secretary and the other staff of the society, the brother of the de facto BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 10 complainant given First Information Statement, which led to registration of this crime. Ultimately, it is submitted by the 2nd accused that, since there is no allegation to be read out from the prosecution records to the effect that the Secretary misappropriated the amounts, only supervisory laches could be found against the Secretary. In such a case, arrest and custodial interrogation of the Secretary, are not necessary for the purpose of investigation and therefore, the petitioner may be released on bail, on conditions, to facilitate investigation.
7. The learned counsel for the 4 th accused would submit that, the 4th accused admittedly is the one and only clerical staff in the Society and the documents of the Bank, forming part of the case diary, including enquiry report under Section 65 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (for short, 'the Act' hereinafter) filed by the Union Inspector, Ranni, would go to show that, the charge of cashier was given to Divya Vijayan, keeping outside the junior clerk, who is competent to deal with the duty of cashier. Therefore, the petitioner has no complicity in this matter and on this premise, he deserves BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 11 pre-arrest bail.
8. The learned counsel for the 3 rd accused Divya Vijayan would submit that, Divya Vijayan is a scapegoat in this crime and the 2nd and the 4th accused in this crime manipulated records and siphoned off money in this crime and also in relation to other crimes registered. According to him, the 3rd accused is now removed from service and she has been hailing to survive. Therefore, she is ready to co-operate with the investigation and she may be released on anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the letter given by Divya, relied on by the learned counsel for the 3rd accused itself, is a forged document created to fasten criminal liability on Divya alone, though the Secretary and the other staff cleverly manipulated records by giving charge of cashier to Divya and misappropriated the amount.
9. While opposing grant of bail to the petitioners, the learned counsel for the de facto complainant filed Crl.M.A.No.1/2022, to receive additional document. The additional document is the enquiry report, at the instance of the Unit Inspector, Angady, under Section 65 of the BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 12 Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, prepared in connection with misappropriation pertaining to Chethackal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. The learned counsel placed copy of First Information Reports in connected crimes registered, against the petitioners and the other accused, after noting misappropriation of huge amount from the account of the Co-operative Bank, by the accused, by manipulating records.
10. The following are the copies of FIRs placed by the learned counsel for the de facto complainant:
1. Crime No.38/2022 of Vechoochira Police Station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 120B, 409, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
In this crime, the allegation includes misappropriation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only), on getting signature of the de facto complainant, on the promise of granting house maintenance loan to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only).
2. Crime No.40/2022 of Vechoochira Police Station.
In this crime also, the offences are the same and the allegation is that, Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 13 was misappropriated in similar way, as done in Crime No.20/2021, through the account of the de facto complainant in the said crime.
3. Crime No.41/2022 of Vechoochira Police Station. In this crime also, the allegation is one and the same, wherein, Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) was misappropriated in similar way, as alleged in Crime Nos.20/2021 and 40/2022.
4. Crime No.514/2022 of Vechoochira Police Station. In this crime, the offenes alleged are under Sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and in the said crime, Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh only), was misappropriated.
11. According to the learned counsel for the de facto complainant, the Secretary and the clerical staff, are the persons, who, by using the 3 rd accused, manipulated the documents and swallowed the entire amount involved in all these crimes and the one and only staff/clerk, who is arrayed as the 4 th accused in this crime, also helped the Secretary in this endeavor, after posting the 3rd accused as the cashier, for the purpose of BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 14 achieving their goal. It is submitted further that, these applications for anticipatory bail, have been filed during the year 2021 (9.2.2021, 4.3.2021 and 19.5.2021) and thereafter, an order 'not to arrest' was obtained from this Court. Thereafter, the accused are enjoying the misappropriated money and stalling the investigation under the cover of 'not to arrest' order.
12. According to the learned counsel for the de facto complainant, though other crimes also registered, nobody arrested in those crimes also because of the political pressure, since the persons involved in this crimes, are the henchmen of the ruling party of Kerala. According to the learned counsel for the de facto complainant, these bail applications may be dismissed, with liberty of the Investigating Officer to arrest and proceed with the investigation involving Rs.20 Lakh in this crime and crores of rupees altogether, as could be read out from Section 65 enquiry report, filed by the Unit Inspector, Angady.
13. The learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 15 submitted that, as things stand now, none of the petitioners can get out of the clutches of criminal liability, since crores of rupees misappropriated in the same way, Rs.20 Lakh was misappropriated in the present crime. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the complicity of the Secretary, the cashier and the clerk, who dealt with the matter, is joint and they cannot claim absolute innocence and therefore, the allegations in this crime would require fair and reasonable investigation. Since forgery of documents and use of the same as genuine also is alleged and the de facto complainant had given consistent statement that the de facto complainant did not know anything about availing of Rs.20 Lakh, as loan, through his account and Leelamma, whose property was offered as mortgage also did not know the mortgaging and availing of loan by her property, the matter requires effective investigation, for which, arrest and custodial interrogation, are absolutely necessary.
14. The crux of the prosecution case in the present crime is availing of loan to the tune of Rs.20 Lakh through the account of the de facto complainant, vide BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 16 account No.3591, which was opened for the purpose of availing Agricultural Loan to purchase a cow, on 22.5.2020. The specific case of the de facto complainant is that, he did not know about the sanctioning of Rs.20 Lakh, as loan, by mortgaging the property of one Leelamma. Leelamma also given statement to the police that she did not know about mortgaging of her property and grant of loan in the name of the de facto complainant. The prosecution allegation is that, the accused herein, after sharing common intention, created forged documents, used the same as genuine and committed breach of trust, being responsible persons of the Co-operative Bank and thereby, misappropriated Rs.20 Lakh and cheated the Bank and his beneficiaries.
15. On perusal of the other crimes pointed out by the learned counsel for the de facto complainant, the allegations are more or less similar. The facts, as could be noticed from this crime and other crimes hereinabove discussed, along with the report filed under Section 65 of the Act, is that the manipulations are more than what have been elicited through the FIRs now available before BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 17 this Court. Nobody could say that a cashier alone can forge the records and misappropriate huge amount without the connivance of the Secretary and also the other staff, who also has role while processing forged documents for granting loan. Thus, the complicity of the petitioners cannot be read in segregation. Since the allegations in Section 65 report runs into 66 pages, detailing multiple manipulations, this Court cannot discuss all those manipulations, in detail. Therefore, this Court categorically read the report, showing manipulations and misappropriation of crores of rupees from the Co-operative Bank, i.e., public money.
16. At present, there are 6 crimes highlighted before this Court and as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the de facto complainant, more crimes are at the stage of investigation and the investigation has been stalled because of the 'not to arrest' order, granted by other learned Judge of this Court. Since the allegations with regard to forging of documents, using the same as genuine and breach of trust by the responsible officers BAIL APPL. NOS. 1600, 2205 & 4080 OF 2021 18 and Secretary, and misappropriation of the same by cheating, established in this case, prima facie, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Therefore, arrest, custodial interrogation and the details regarding the way, in which, documents were forged and used to misappropriate the money, are absolutely necessary and in such a case, grant of anticipatory bail not only would halter the investigation, but the same would be akin to honourable/honorous acquittal of the accused, during investigation.
Therefore, all these petitions must fail and are accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE Bb