Kerala High Court
Alhad. K vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAYOF NOVEMBER 2016/18TH KARTHIKA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 4868 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 952/2016 OF KAZHAKOOTTAM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
......
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------------
ALHAD. K.,
S/O K. KAMALUDHEEN, AGED 34 YEARS,
SA NIVAS, KARIYIL, KAZHAKOOTTAM P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
-------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
KAZHAKOOTAM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KAZHAKOOTTAM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 004.
* ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED
4. ROSHNI, W/O. BEEMAKANNU,
POONTHOTTATHU PUTHEN VEEDU,
NEAR VELLAR MOSQUE, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE,
VENGANOOR PANCHAYAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
NOW RESIDING AT HEERA APARTMENT NO.14,
JAGATHY WARD, THYCAUD VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
* IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R4 AS PER ORDER DATED 11/08/2016
IN CRL.MA. NO.7412/2016 IN BA. NO.4868/2016.
R1 TO R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.K.K. SHEEBA.
ADDL. R4 BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A. No.4868 of 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of November, 2016
O R D E R
This is an application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
2. When the petition came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before me that the allegation is that the petitioner committed offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of IPC.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that offering a seat at Ambedkar Medical College, Bangalore, a sum of Rs.15 lakhs was taken by the petitioner herein and the seat was not arranged. The petitioner also did not pay back the money. Thereafter it was known to the defacto complainant that he was cheating.
4. The main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the element of cheating is lacking in the transaction.
5. The incident is that of the year 2012. As directed by this court, a mediation talk was conducted but it was not successful. Thus, considering the nature of the offence and B.A. No.4868 of 2016 2 all other attending circumstances the following order passed:
If so advised, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days of this order. On such appearance, the investigating officer is at liberty to interrogate the petitioner. After interrogation, if arrest is necessary, he is at liberty to arrest the petitioner. Thereafter, if any recovery is necessary, that also can be made. Then, the petitioner shall be produced before the concerned magistrate. On such production, if a bail application is moved, by giving advance notice to the concerned Prosecutor, shall be considered expeditiously. It is further made clear that if an application under Section 311A of Cr.P.C. is filed by the police, the bail application need be considered only after the disposal of the said application.
Sd/-
K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/