Kerala High Court
Renuka. R vs State Of Kerala on 12 March, 2024
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 1524 OF 2024
CRIME NO.5/2020 OF VEEYAPURAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 10 AND 11:
1 RENUKA. R
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O THULASEEDHARAN, RADHA VILASAM,
MELILA, P.O, KUNNICODUM KOTTARAKARA,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691508
2 K.G. VIJAYAMANI
AGED 67 YEARS
W/O K. SSIDHARAN PILLAI,
VIJAYA BHAVAN, MELILA,
KOTTARAKARA, PIN - 691557
BY ADVS.
ALEXANDER GEORGE
THARA BOSE
LITA CHANDRAN.S
RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
VEEYAPUARAM POLICE STATION,
ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. PIN, PIN - 688001
3 DETECTIVE INSPECTOR CRIME BRANCH
CRIME BRANCH OFFICE, ALAPUZHA,
PIN - 688001
BY SMT. SEETHA. S SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.1524 of 2024
-:2:-
ORDER
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2024 The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for an order of pre- arrest bail.
2. The petitioners are the accused 10 and 11 in Crime No. 5/2020 of the Veeyapuram Polilce Station, Alappuzha, registered against them for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The crux of the prosecution case is that: the defacto complainant and her husband had deposited money in Pearls Agro tech Corporation Ltd.(PACL Ltd), a private financial institution, which has been managed and administered by the accused 1 and 2. The accused 10 and 11 were the Senior Executives of the said company. The accused had convinced the defacto complainant and her husband to invest money in the said B.A.No.1524 of 2024 -:3:- company, assuring them interest as well as a huge profit. Consequently, the defacto complainant and her husband had deposited Rs.17,920/- and 31,840/- respectively, in the said company. However, the accused failed to give any profit or return the capital. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
4. Heard; Sri. Alexander George, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Seetha. S, the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have no active role in the company. They were not in charge of the management or administration of the company. The company was managed by the accused 1 and 2. Taking into consideration all these aspects, by Annexure A3 and A4 orders, this Court had granted orders of pre-arrest bail to the similarly situated employees. The petitioners are also entitled to the benefits of the said orders. Hence, the application may be allowed.
B.A.No.1524 of 2024-:4:-
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the accused company had defrauded several persons. The investigation in the case is in progress. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the petitioners are only the paid employees of the company, and Annexure A3 and A4 orders have been passed to persons similarly situated in the petitions.
7. On an anxious consideration to the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, the materials placed on record, especially taking note of Annexure A3 and A4 orders passed in favour of the persons similarly situated as the petitioners, who are also the paid employees of the first accused company, I am of the definite view that the petitioners' custodial interrogation is not necessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioners are entitled to an order of pre-arrest bail, subject to the condition that they cooperate with the Investigating Officer.
In the result, the application is allowed subject to B.A.No.1524 of 2024 -:5:- the following conditions:
i) The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today.
ii) In the event of the petitioners' arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce them before the jurisdictional court on the date of surrender itself.
iii) On such production, the jurisdictional court shall release the petitioners on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;
iv) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation as and when the Investigating Officer directs;
v). The petitioners shall not intimidate witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner;
vi). The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passports, they shall file an affidavit to B.A.No.1524 of 2024 -:6:- the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;
(vii) The petitioners shall not get involved in any other offence while on bail.
viii). In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.
ix). Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall also be filed before the court below.
x) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE mtk/12.03.24 B.A.No.1524 of 2024 -:7:- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1524/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.5/2020 DATED 3.1.2020 ANNEXURE 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 12.4.2022 ANNEXURE 3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN BA NO. 3283 /2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ON 7.3.2023 ANNEXURE 4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN BA NO. 9656 /2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ON 1.2.2024