Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Aravinthakshan Nair Aged 72 Years vs State Of Kerala on 18 February, 2014

Author: N.K.Balakrishnan

Bench: N.K.Balakrishnan

       

  

  

 
 
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT:

           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

     TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/29TH MAGHA, 1935

                 Bail Appl..No. 1128 of 2014 ()
                 -------------------------------
       CRIME NO.205/2014 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 :-
----------------------------------

   1. ARAVINTHAKSHAN NAIR AGED 72 YEARS
       S/O.GOPALAPILLAI, SHRIVIHAR, NEAR VAYANASHALA JUNCTION
       CHANDANATHOPPU, KOLLAM.

   2. RADHAMANI AMMA AGED 65 YEARS
       MUKALUVILA VEEDU, CHEMMAKADU CHERY, PANAYAM
       KOLLAM.

       BY ADVS.SRI.C.RAJENDRAN
               SRI.K.R.RANJITH

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :-
---------------------------

       STATE OF KERALA
       REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
       HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

       BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN


       THIS BAIL APPLICATION  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION  ON
18-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:




jvt



                    N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                      B.A. No.1128 of 2014
                     -------------------------------
           Dated this the 18th day of February 2014


                             O R D E R

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.205/2014 of Kundara Police Station. The offences alleged against them are punishable under Secs.420 and 468 r/w 34 IPC. It is alleged that a promissory note was forged by A1 with the help of A2.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a promissory note was executed by the complainant in favour of the first petitioner and he has already filed a suit before the Munsiff Court, Kollam, which is pending now. It is only to get over that suit, a false complaint has been filed contending that forgery has been committed by the petitioners. I am not entering into the merits of the case.

3. Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. When applied for bail by the accused, the learned B.A. No.1128 of 2014 -: 2 :- Magistrate will grant bail to the petitioners but on the following conditions:
a. The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties. b. The first petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and should appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.
c. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc. Sd/-
N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J UDGE.
//True Copy// P.A. To Judge Jvt