Kerala High Court
M.R.Bimaldani vs State Of Kerala on 3 February, 2021
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942
Bail Appl..No.6701 OF 2020
CRIME NO.1494/2017 OF Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 M.R.BIMALDANI
AGED 60 YEARS,S/O. RUDRAN,
MAKKADATHU,
AZEEKKAL P.O., 690547
2 L.K. CHANDRA BOSE
AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. LEKSHMANAN,
KOCHUTHOPPIL,
AZEEKKAL P.O., 690547
3 RAJI S.,
AGED 51 YEARS, W/O. RADHAKRISHNAN
VADAKKE MATHASERIL
AZEEKKAL P.O., 690547
4 MINI S.,
AGED 43 YEARS, D/O. RAMACHANDRAN,
SABHALAYAM,
AMRITHAPURI P.O.,690546
5 P.SADANANDAN
AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN,
UNYASSERIL,
AZHEEKKAL P.O., 690547
6 CHANDRADATH
AGED 82 YEARS, S/O. KESAVAN,
PUTHUPARAMBIL,
AZHEEKKAL P.O., 690547
B.A. No.6701/20 -:2:-
7 S.SUHASINI
AGED 56 YEARS, D/O. KESAVAN,
KATTIL THEKKATHIL,
CHERIYAZHEKKAL P.O.,690573
8 K.LAVAN
AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. KOCHUPILLAI,
THAZHCHAYIL,
ALUMKAVADU P.O.,690573
9 SISUPALAN
AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. BHASKARAN,
CHIRAVARAMPIL,
EDAKULANGARA P.O., 690523
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.K.ANAND (A-1921)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, 682031
*2 JOINT REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR,
KARUNAGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM CITY,
KERALA, IN-690518
*(ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
11/11/2020 IN CRL.M.Appl.No.1/2020
SRI.DHANIL M.R., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. No.6701/20 -:3:-
ORDER
Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2021 Petitioners were the Director Board members of the Alappadu Panchayat Service Co-operative bank during the year 2015-16. They seek pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since they are arrayed as accused in Crime No.1494 of 2017 of Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam. The offences alleged against the petitioners are manifold. They are under Sections 403, 405, 406, 409, 420, 464, 465, 468, 471 and 477A read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that, while the 1 st accused was the Secretary and accused Nos.2 to 10 were the Director Board members of the aforementioned Co-operative Bank, they committed misappropriation after forging documents and committed criminal breach of trust by defrauding the subscribers of a chitty and also misappropriated the Tsunami relief fund allotted to the said Society for being distributed among various fishermen, who were affected by Tsunami. It is submitted that, the 1st accused, after trying to clear off the various amounts alleged to have been misappropriated by her, committed suicide. The case against the petitioners, who are accused Nos.2 to 10, relates only to the alleged B.A. No.6701/20 -:4:- misappropriation of the Tsunami relief fund.
3. I have heard Adv. S.Rajeev, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Adv.Dhanil M.R., learned Public Prosecutor.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of anticipatory bail and submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioners are necessary since the details of diversion of funds or misappropriation of the Tsunami relief fund etc., cannot be identified.
5. The main allegation in the case was as against the 1 st accused, who is admittedly no more, whereas the allegation against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 to 10, is merely on the ground that they being Director Board members of the Co-operative Bank have misappropriated Tsunami Relief fund. Petitioners do have a case that the Tsunami relief fund, as per discussions and agreements made at the higher levels of management, was utilized to clear off the loans due to various fisher-folk, who were affected by the Tsunami itself and hence, there was no question of any misappropriation by them in the strict sense of the word.
6. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners are matters for investigation. However, taking note of the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioners and also taking into reckoning the fact that there are no criminal antecedents levelled against B.A. No.6701/20 -:5:- the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.
7. In the result, this application is allowed, but subject to the following conditions:
i. It is directed that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners in connection with Crime No.1494 of 2017 of the Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer effecting the arrest.
ii. The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 10 a.m. and 12.30 p.m. every first Saturday for three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
iii. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, 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. iv. The petitioners shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.B.A. No.6701/20 -:6:-
v. The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate. vi. Petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer. vii. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the court concerned, on being noticed of that fact, will be empowered to cancel the bail.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
vps
/True Copy/ PS to Judge