Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 9TH MAGHA 193 Bail Appl..No. 9446 of 2012 () ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 942/2011 OF PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT ------------ PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 : --------------------------------------------------- 1. BIJU S/O.GOPINATHAN ACHARI, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU NADAKKAL, KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM.
2. REMYA W/O.BIJU,CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, NADAKKAL KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARIPPALLI POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. *ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED *2. NADAKKAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KALLUVATHUKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT. *ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD. 1/1/2013 IN CRL. M.A. NO. 8336/2012 IN BA NO. 9446/2012. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V.S. SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn P. BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No.9446 of 2012 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013
ORDERThe petitioners are accused Nos.1 & 2 in Crime No.942/2011 of Parippalli Police Station who were alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424 & 425 r/w. Section 34 of I.P.C.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they had availed of loan from the defacto complainant bank, by mortgaging their property. However they defaulted in repayment of loan. They assigned the mortgaged property to a money lending firm who in turn assigned it to other persons. On the basis of that transaction the bank preferred a private complaint under Section 156 (3), which was forwarded for investigation and crime was registered.
3. It is difficult to understand how a complaint be B.A. No.9446 of 2012 -2- lodged. The fact that the property is mortgaged does not preclude mortgagor from selling the equity of redemption.
4. A deeper probe into the matter is unwarranted at this point of time. Considering the facts and circumstances, it is felt that it is just and proper to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly, the petition is allowed as follows: i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on 05.02.2013, who after interrogation shall produce them before the JFCM concerned and on application for bail being moved by the petitioners, the learned Magistrate shall release the petitioners on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Court. ii) The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts before granting bail. iii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Thursday between 9 am and 10 am till final report is laid. iv) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witness. B.A. No.9446 of 2012 -3- v) If any of the condition is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the JFCM concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law. Sd/- P. BHAVADASAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/