Kerala High Court
Rajaram P vs State Of Kerala on 29 January, 2019
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
TUESDAY ,THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 9TH MAGHA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 8387 of 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1008/2018 of SESSIONS COURT,
MANJERI DATED 21-11-2018
CRIME NO. 192/2018 OF Perumpadappu Police Station , Malappuram
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RAJARAM P.,
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.RAVUNNI NAIR,
POOKKATTIRI HOUSE,
ERAMANGALAM(PO), MALAPPURAM, PIN-679587.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SMT.ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHY
SRI.MATHEW A KUZHALANADAN
SRI.SUDEEP ARAVIND PANICKER
RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 ADDL.R2 SUNIL.M
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O MADHAVA MENON K,
VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KODATHU,
PERUMPADAPPU PO, MALAPPURAM-679580.
(ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11/12/2018
IN CRL.MA.03/2018)
BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP C.N PRABHAKARAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.8387/18
2
ORDER
Petitioner stands arrayed as an accused in Crime No.192 of 2018 in Perumpadappu Police Station for offences punishable under sections 420, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 r/w the Essential Commodities Act and the Kerala Rationing Order 1966.
2. Petitioner was the Secretary of a Co-operative bank which was running a licensed wholesale ration depot AWD 16. On the basis of the newspaper reports that certain malpractices were going on in the society, verification was conducted by the District Supply Officer and other officials. By Annexure-A6 letter, the Sub Inspector of Police, Perumpadappu was informed that, on a verification of the records and stocks, the total quantity of 300 quintals of rice and 61.21 quintals of wheat were found to be misused. Accordingly, crime was registered.
3. Case diary indicates that, there was a further letter from the District Supply Office dated 06.10.2018, by which, on the basis of an enquiry conducted by the District Supply Vigilance, a report regarding the misuse to the extent of 1324.45.915 quintals of rice and 636.90.530 quintals of wheat were found out. Accordingly, crime was registered against the accused including the petitioner.
4. The case diary was placed before me. Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the impleading petitioner, who claimed to be a panchayath member and also the learned B.A.8387/18 3 Public Prosecutor. It seems that the shortage is regarding the period covering 2014 to 2017. Even the report of the District Supply Officer indicates that the records were not properly maintained. The same records are relied on by the Taluk Supply Officer and the Vigilance Officer to arrive at a conclusion that, there was a shortage of stock. Definitely, if there is a shortage of stock, it is for the society and for its members to answer. According to the learned senior counsel, a go-down manager was appointed, who was in charge of the go-down and he was liable to release the intented wheat and rice. If there is any deficiency, he is bound to answer. However, licensee is the Secretary. He is also liable for the proper accounting of stock and its disbursement. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that, all transactions are borne by records, both of the wholesale dealer as well as the corresponding records maintained by the retailers to whom the stock is supplied, I do not feel that, though a detailed investigation is liable to be conducted, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is warranted. Having considered this, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner herein subject to the following conditions.
(i) Petitioner shall appear before the investigation officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.
B.A.8387/184
(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.
(iii) He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall make available all the records, registers and documents, which are found to be in his possession and which are essential for the further progress of the investigation, for which, demand is made by the investigating officer for production.
(iv) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.
Anticipatory bail application is allowed as above.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE Sbna