Kerala High Court
Sasi Kumar K vs State Of Kerala on 11 December, 2015
Author: A.Hariprasad
Bench: A.Hariprasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD
FRIDAY,THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937
Bail Appl..No. 7772 of 2015 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 500/CR/EOW-I/KLM/10 OF CBCID-EOW-I, PATHANAMTHITTA ,
CRIME NO. 130/2010 OF PATHANAMTITTA POLICE STATION,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT
----------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED A2 :
--------------------------------------
SASI KUMAR K., AGED 55 YEARS,
S/O.KUTTAN PILLAI, UTHRUTTATHIL HOUSE,
T.C. 5/311, INDIRA NAGAR, PEROORKADA P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :
--------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R. REMA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
bp
A.HARIPRASAD, J.
------------------------------------------------
B.A.No.7772 of 2015
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of December, 2015
O R D E R
Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Petitioner is second the accused in Crime No.500/CR/EOW-1/KLM/10 of CBCID-I of Pathanamthitta unit (Crime No.1030/2010 of Pathanamthitta Police Station) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 380 and 120(b) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is alleged that he along with other two accused in the crime cheated Kerala Financial Corporation (for short 'KFC'). The petitioner was the manager of the KFC branch. First accused availed a loan by deposit of title deeds. The petitioner even before closing the loan returned the title deed to the first accused as part of conspiracy between all the accused persons. KFC thereby suffered loss.
4. Heard both sides.
B.A.No.7772 of 2015 2
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner is innocent. According to him, he left the branch in the year 2000. Thereafter, several managers worked in the branch. Not only that, he retried from service on 2008.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. She submitted that the petitioner is abroad. As he was absconding a lookout notice was issued in this case.
7. Considering the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail with the following conditions:
(a) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of 'two weeks' from today and submit himself for interrogation. If the Investigating Officer requires can interrogating for continuously three days. Thereafter, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like B.A.No.7772 of 2015 3 sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(b) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed for the purpose of interrogation.
(c) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
(d) The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses.
(e) The petitioner shall not in any manner interfere or meddle with the investigation.
(f) The petitioner shall not, during the period of this bail get involved in any offence.
In case any of the above conditions is violated, bail granted hereby is liable to be cancelled for which the investigating officer may move application before the jurisdictional magistrate.
Sd/-
A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
AS /True Copy/
P.A. To Judge