Kerala High Court
Shanto T.K vs State Of Kerala on 25 November, 2019
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019
CRIME NO.2335/2016 OF ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 SHANTO T.K.
AGED 51 YEARS
THARAYIL HOUSE, CHERUKADAPPURAM,
NORTH KUTHIYATHODE P.O, PUTHENVELIKKARA,
PARAVUR
2 JIJI C. GEORGE,
S/O. C.C GEEVARGHESE, POOTHICOTE HOUSE,
TEMPLE ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI
3 C.G YESUDAS,
CHAMBAKOTTUKUDIYIL, THRIKKARIYOOR P.O,
KOTHAMANGALAM
4 RAJAN P.J,
S/O. JOHN, PARAPPAN HOUSE, (HOUSE NO.109)
N.PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM
5 UNNI JOSEPH,
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, VELLILANKOL HOUSE,
MUVATTUPUZHA, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O,
PIN 686 661
BY ADVS.
SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER
SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN
SRI.ROY JOSEPH
SRI.E.HARIDAS
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PIN-682 031
Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019 2
2 STATION HOSUE OFFICER,
ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION,
SUB JAIL ROAD, PWD QUARTERS P.O,
KERALA 683101
3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CRME BRANCH UNIT, BUILDING NO. AMC/XV/219,
ALUVA, PWD QUARTERS P.O, KERALA 683101
SRI RAMESH CHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019 3
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Crime No.2335/2016 of the Aluva East Police Station was registered on 27.6.2016 alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 109 r/w Sec.34 of the IPC. The sole accused was the President of the Thirukochi Rural Agricultural Production and Marketing Co-operative Society E-179.
3. According to the de facto complainant, he was approached by the accused and was induced to believe that he would be made the Vice President of the Society, if he invested a sum of Rs.15 lakhs. He was also assured with a profit share from the business. A total sum of Rs.12 lakhs was handed over to the 1st accused. When the 1st accused failed to honour his assurance, information was furnished and the Crime was registered.
4. A detailed investigation was conducted, which revealed that the functioning of the Society was against the relevant provisions of the Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019 4 Act and Rules. It is also revealed that the accounts were not being properly maintained. Huge sums were accepted from numerous persons assuring that jobs would be provided. In the course of investigation, the applicants herein were arrayed as accused.
5. Sri.Julian Xavier, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants, submitted that the applicants herein are innocent and they have been implicated by the Investigating Officer without any materials whatsoever. According to the learned counsel, as per Annexure A1, minutes dated 22.10.2014, the applicants herein were elected as members of the Temporary Administrative Committee of the Co-operative Society. However, immediately thereafter, the applicants realised that the functioning of the Society is against the provisions of the Act and Rules and also against the bylaws of the Society. There arose difference of opinion when the petitioners questioned the act of the President. On 11.12.2014, a decision was taken by the Society to expel the applicants from the committee. Reliance is placed by the learned counsel on Annexure A3 to substantiate this fact. The learned counsel would also refer to the judgment of this Court in WP(C).No.24835 of 2016, which is produced as Annexure A6, and he points out that the applicants herein had highlighted the wrongs Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019 5 committed by the President as well as other members and this Court had directed the initiation of appropriate action by appointing an administrator.
6. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor and I have perused the records.
7. Having considered the submissions advanced and after perusing the records made available, I find considerable merit in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the applicants. In the facts and circumstances, I do not think that the custodial interrogation of the applicants are required for an effective investigation.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigation Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if they are proposed to be arrested, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. However, the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any Bail Appl..No.7995 OF 2019 6 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
iii) The petitioners shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE IAP