Kerala High Court
Sudheep V.V vs Station House Officer on 13 February, 2019
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 24TH MAGHA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 930 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 677/2019 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS ,VADAKARA DATED 01-02-2018
CRIME NO. 1007/2018 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SUDHEEP V.V.,AGED 30 YEARS
S/O GOPINATHAN,
THALIYIL HOUSE, NEAR GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
KANNADIPARAMBU PO, KANNUR.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.ASHIS
SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
VATAKARA POLICE STATION,
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682 031.
SR.PP C.K SURESH
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 930 of 2019
2
ORDER
The petitioner herein stands arrayed as the first accused in Crime No.1007 of 2018 of Vatakara Police Station, for offences punishable under sections 420, 463, 465, 468, 489A and 489D read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The allegation of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein along with his wife, the second accused and his distant relative, the third accused had assured procurement of an NRI seat in a medical college at Karnataka State. Accordingly, he obtained Rs.1,17,00,000/- (Rupees one crore seventeen lakhs only) from the defacto complainant in installments. Thereafter, without arranging a seat and without repaying the amount so collected, the accused committed cheating; it was alleged. The petitioner herein was arrested on 30.01.2019 and is in custody since then. He seeks bail.
3. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, the petitioner herein collected huge amounts and about Bail Appl..No. 930 of 2019 3 Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees seventeen lakhs only) alone was repaid. It is also brought out in the course of investigation, that the petitioner herein had forged certain receipts, to evidence that a portion of the amount was returned as refund from college. However, the college authorities have clarified that such a receipt was not issued by the college.
5. Considering the serious nature of allegations and the fact that the remaining accused are still not apprehended, I feel that the petitioner cannot be granted bail at this stage.
Bail Application fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE R.AV //True Copy// PA to Judge