Skip to content


V J John Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Kerala High Court

Decided On

Judge

Appellant

V J John

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt:


.....application. case is that the petitioner and his son, the 1st accused issued cheque on the account maintained by the petitioner in favour of the defacto complainant for discharge of a liability but the cheque was dishonoured as signature differed. the final report is filed in the judicial first class magistrate court-i, chengannur on 15.02.2012 and a case is pending as c.c. no.522 of 2012.3. learned counsel submits that even if the allegations are true, 1st accused signed the cheque without the knowledge and consent of the petitioner.4. having regard to the circumstances, i am bail appl. no.859 of 2014 2 inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but, subject to conditions. the application is allowed as under. (i) petitioner is granted bail in crime no.1150 of 2011 of the chengannur police station (c.c. no.522 of 2012 of the judicial first class magistrate court-i, chengannur). (ii) petitioner shall surrender before the learned judicial first class magistrate-i, chengannur in the aforesaid case within two week from this day. (iii) on such surrender the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for rs.20,000/- (rupees.....

Judgment:


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE11H DAY OF FEBRUARY201422ND MAGHA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 859 of 2014 ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 1150/2011 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA ....... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------- V.J.

JOHN, AGED66YEARS, S/O.JOHN VELLOORUZHATHIL, VELLOORUZHATHIL HOUSE, THITTAMEL, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682 031.

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION - 689 101. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1102-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.

-------------------------------- Bail Appl. No.859 of 2014 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February 2014 ORDER

Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1150 of 2011 of the Chengannur Police station for the offence punishable under Sec.420 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. Case is that the petitioner and his son, the 1st accused issued cheque on the account maintained by the petitioner in favour of the defacto complainant for discharge of a liability but the cheque was dishonoured as signature differed. The final report is filed in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur on 15.02.2012 and a case is pending as C.C. No.522 of 2012.

3. Learned counsel submits that even if the allegations are true, 1st accused signed the cheque without the knowledge and consent of the petitioner.

4. Having regard to the circumstances, I am Bail Appl. No.859 of 2014 2 inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but, subject to conditions. The application is allowed as under. (I) Petitioner is granted bail in Crime No.1150 of 2011 of the Chengannur Police station (C.C. No.522 of 2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur). (II) Petitioner shall surrender before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Chengannur in the aforesaid case within two week from this day. (III) On such surrender the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions: (a) Petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for Bail Appl. No.859 of 2014 3 interrogation. (b) Petitioner shall not get involved in similar offence during the period of this bail. (c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. (d) In case any of the above conditions is violated, it is open to the investigating officer to file application before the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail granted hereby, as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR2006SC100. (IV) It is made clear that in case the petitioner does not surrender before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Chengannur within the aforesaid time , this order will cease to be effective on the expiry of the said time. Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE /True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //