Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE5H DAY OF NOVEMBER201314TH KARTHIKA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 7238 of 2013 -------------------------------------- [CRIME NO. 1293/2013 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION , KOLLAM DISTRICT] ................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- SURESH, AGED41YEARS, S/O KUNJUPANIKKAN, KANDATHIL PUTHENVEEDU, VILLIMANGALAM, MUNDROTHURUTHU, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.SIJU KAMALASANAN, SMT.BINDU GEORGE, SMT.CHITHRA.S.BABU. RESPONDENT: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SREEJITH. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0511-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.
-------------------------------- Bail Appl. No.7238 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of November 2013 ORDER
Petitioner is the accused, in Crime No.1293 of 2013 of the East Kallada Police station for the offences punishable under Secs.406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed this application.
2. Learned counsel submits that the allegation is that the petitioner offered job for the husband of the defacto complainant in Saudi Arabia and received Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only). The husband of the defacto complainant was given job but, he did not get salary. According to the learned counsel, the allegations are not true and at any rate no offences is made out. It is also submitted that the petitioner only mediated transaction between husband of the petitioner and the person who offered job for him.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that apart from the above, there is a further allegation that the petitioner fraudulently obtained Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakhs fifty thousand only) from the sponsor Bail Appl. No.7238 of 2013 2 of husband of the defacto complainant and has not repaid the amount. Consequently, husband of the defacto complainant is unable to come to his native place.
4. Having heard both sides, I am inclined to think that petitioner has to make himself available for interrogation by the Police officer.
5. The question whether the petitioner could be released on bail has to be decided by the jurisdictional magistrate. Resultantly the application is disposed of as under.
1. Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.1293 of 2013 of the East Kallada Police Station on 11.11.2013 at 10.00 am for interrogation.
2. In case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply.
3. After interrogation, in case arrest of the Bail Appl. No.7238 of 2013 3 petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
4. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, it is open to the investigating officer to move application before the learned magistrate.
5. It is open to the petitioner to seek bail before the learned magistrate with intimation given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned at least three working days in advance.
6. If any such application(s) is made, learned magistrate shall consider the applications on merit and pass appropriate orders as early as possible. Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE NS