Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Unknown vs By Advs.Sri.Krishnadas P. Nair on 8 January, 2018

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 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 18TH POUSHA, 1939

                                   Bail Appl..No. 9072 of 2017
                                   ---------------------------
            CRIME NO. 357/2017 OF EDACHERRY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE
                                         --------------


PETITIONER/ACCUSED A2
---------------------

       PRAVEENA,
       W/O. SHAJI, AGED 32 YEARS, MANAKKAL HOUSE, ONCHIYAM,
       VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673513

   BY ADVS.SRI.KRISHNADAS P. NAIR
           SMT.K.L.SREEKALA
           SRI.HARIDAS P.NAIR
           SRI.M.A.VINOD
           SRI.M.RAJESH KUMAR
           SMT.B.SABITHA (DESOM)


RESPONDENT:
----------

       STATE OF KERALA,
       REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
       HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
       ERNAKULAM

        BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI SAJJU.S.

       THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2018,
       THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.V.

               RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J
          --------------------------------------------
                    B.A No.9072 of 2017
         ---------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 8th day of January, 2018

                           ORDER

1.This petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2.The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused in Crime No.357 of 2017 of Edacherry Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420, 489A, 489C, 489D, r/w sec.34 of the IPC.

3.On 11.9.2017, the 1st accused in the Crime, who was conducting a mobile shop at Orkkattery, went missing and Crime No.276 of 2017 was registered under Sec.57 of the Kerala Police Act. After a couple of months, on 13.11.2017, the petitioner who was employed in the mobile shop of the 1st accused also went missing and consequently Crime No. 336 of 2017 was registered under Sec.57 of the Police Act. On 9.12.2017, both the accused were traced out at Calicut. After arrest, the 1st floor of the residential house occupied by the 1st accused at Jail road, Calicut was searched. A computer, a printer, scanner, 86 fake currency notes of 100 rupee denomination, one fake currency note of Rs.50 B.A No.9072 of 2017 2 denomination, one fake currency note of Rs.20 denomination, one sided photocopies of currency notes, 26 fake lottery tickets and fake name tags of media personnel were seized. The petitioner was also arrested on 10.12.2017. She is languishing in custody since then.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady and she was working in the mobile shop room of the 1st accused for the past eight years. The only allegation against her is that she had transported the computer, printer and scanner from the mobile shop to the place where the 1st accused was residing at Jail road, Calicut. According to the learned counsel, the husband of the petitioner is abroad and she is the mother of a minor child. Except for the fact that she is an employee of the 1 st accused, she has no serious role to play.

5.The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the investigation conducted till date reveals the complicity of the petitioner. The petitioner had supplied equipment as well as money and she was residing with the 1st accused after ditching her family. She cannot now contend that she was unaware of the acts committed by the B.A No.9072 of 2017 3 1st accused is the submission.

6.I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the materials on records. The statement of the witnesses would reveal that the petitioner was working as an employee in the shop of the 1st accused for the past more than eight years. The role attributed to the petitioner when compared to that of the 1st accused is minor. It appears that the investigation has proceeded much.

7.Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the period of detention undergone and other facts and circumstances, I am of the view that bail can now be granted to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

In the result, this application will stand allowed. However, it shall be subject to the following conditions:

1). The petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-

(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

2). The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., for 2 months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. B.A No.9072 of 2017 4

3). The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall she tamper with the evidence.

4). The petitioner shall not commit any offence while she is on bail.

5).The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the court below or if she does not have one, she shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of her release. Application for release of the passport, if any, shall be considered by the Trial court at the appropriate stage.

6). The petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the concerned Court.

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 //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE AD