Kerala High Court
T.R.Vijyakumaran Nair vs State Of Kerala on 30 March, 2016
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/10TH CHAITHRA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 1465 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------
(CRIME NO. 50/2016 OF ARAMMULA POLICE STATION)
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
T.R.VIJYAKUMARAN NAIR
S/O.G.RAMAN PILLAI, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, PULLAD P.O.,
TIRUVELLA, PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADV. SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.U.LALIZA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-
03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
---------------------------------------
B.A.No.1465 of 2016
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of March, 2016
ORDER
The petitioner herein stands indicted in Crime No.50/16 of Aranmula Police Station for offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC.
2. The petitioner herein is running a business in the sale of various commodities including basumathi rice and other grains. He claims to have entered into a contract with a company with registered office at Cotonou, Benin. On the basis of the e-mail communication with the petitioner the company placed an order for the purchase of 312 metric tonnes of non Basumathi rice from the firm of the petitioner herein, for a total price of Rs.1,34,160/- Us Dollars. Towards the payment of that amount, a demand draft for the amount of Rs.1,34,160/- US Dollars drawn on the City Bank of USA was allegedly issued. It was presented for collection through a bank and a sum of Rs.14, 33,320/- was received by the petitioner herein by discounting. It was later found B.A.No.1465 of 2016 2 that the demand draft which was submitted was a forged one. Crime was registered on the basis of the complaint of the bank.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the cheque was forwarded to him on the basis of the agreement for sale. The learned Public Prosecutor contended that it was forged for the purpose of cheating the bank. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he had procured a license for export and import from the Ministry of Commerce and is a genuinely dealer. To substantiate the contention the learned counsel has produced the copy of the e-mails purported to have been exchanged between the petitioner herein and the dealer, who allegedly placed the order.
4. Having regard to these facts and considering the possibility of the petitioner being duped into such a transaction, on the basis of a forged demand draft, after persuading him to despatch the loading of items, I feel that bail can be granted to the petitioner herein subject to the following strict conditions: B.A.No.1465 of 2016 3
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation.
Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum each.
(b) He shall surrender his passport within in 10 days from today before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and if not, file an affidavit at the time of execution of the bond.
(c ) He shall co-operate with the investigation which includes the production of all records, registers and bank pass books in relation to his business, and also those relating to the disputed transaction with the purchaser who placed the order and shall also produce his hard ware and soft ware if required and shall also offer access to the e-mails to counter B.A.No.1465 of 2016 4 check the genuineness of the e-mails purported to have been send, if those documents are found to be in the custody of the petitioner herein and are essential for the investigation.
(d) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant or his witnesses.
(e) He shall not get involved in any other identical offences.
(f) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.
(g) He shall furnish security in the form of an immovable property either belonging to himself or any other third party having a value of not less than Rs.15 lakhs. The petitioner herein or the person offering the property as security shall file an affidavit within 15 days from today offering the property. For the purpose of evaluating the value of the B.A.No.1465 of 2016 5 property, the court below need not insist the production of valuation certificate and can rely on the affidavit filed by the petitioner herein or the owner of the property as the case may be.
The bail application is allowed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE AD