Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Aby K. Vs. State of Kerala

Aby K. vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 01, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1012808

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Aby K.

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....falsely implicated. according to him he had not committed any act. it is also pointed out that the bank had passed relevant cheques which shows no difference in the signature b.a.no.646/2013 -2- of the drawer. it is further pointed out that petitioner has been in custody from 15.11.2012 the his continued custody is unnecessary.4. learned public prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that investigation is still going on and prima facie materials available would show the involvement of the petitioner.5. after having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public prosecutor and perused the records it is difficult to accept the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. at any rate in view of the fact that he was the staff of the section at the relevant time, the allegation against him is that he had forged the signature of the superior, manipulated the records and misappropriated the amount made mentioned of earlier. the allegations are indeed serious and grave and from the records now available, it cannot be said that the petitioner is innocent. b.a.no.646/2013 -3- considering the nature of allegations of the petitioner, manner in which the offence is committed and also the fact that the amount involved is considerable, this court feels that it may not be appropriate to release the petitioner now on bail. the petition is accordingly dismissed. sd/- p.bhavadasan, judge ds //true copy// p.a. to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013 12TH MAGHA 193 Bail Appl..No. 646 of 2013 () ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 1444/2012 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION , KASARGOD ACCUSED(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ ABY K. AGED 3 YEARS S/O. LATE KAMALASANAN,KOLLAMMADATHU HOUSE MARARIKKULAM NORTH PANCHAYATH,15/492,ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.PRADEEPKUMAR COMPLAINANT(S)/COMPLAINANT : -------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. (SUB INSPECTOR (STATION HOUSING OFFICER) KASARAGOD POLICE STATION). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V.S. SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ds P.BHAVADASAN, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 646 OF 201.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 01st day of February, 2013 ORDER

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1444/2012 of Kasaragod Police Station who is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 409, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on audit of the account it was found that amount of Rs. 9,04,875/- has been misappropriated. Superintendent of the concerned institution pointed out that at the relevant time petitioner was in charge of the section and that he is suspected to be forged the signature of the superior officer and misappropriated the account.

3. The petitioner would say that he is innocent and falsely implicated. According to him he had not committed any act. It is also pointed out that the bank had passed relevant cheques which shows no difference in the signature B.A.No.646/2013 -2- of the drawer. It is further pointed out that petitioner has been in custody from 15.11.2012 the his continued custody is unnecessary.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that investigation is still going on and prima facie materials available would show the involvement of the petitioner.

5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the records it is difficult to accept the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. At any rate in view of the fact that he was the staff of the section at the relevant time, the allegation against him is that he had forged the signature of the superior, manipulated the records and misappropriated the amount made mentioned of earlier. The allegations are indeed serious and grave and from the records now available, it cannot be said that the petitioner is innocent. B.A.No.646/2013 -3- Considering the nature of allegations of the petitioner, manner in which the offence is committed and also the fact that the amount involved is considerable, this Court feels that it may not be appropriate to release the petitioner now on bail. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE ds //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial