Soly Joseph vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Aug 04, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1330517

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1330517
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.
Decided On: Aug 04, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./155/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Soly Joseph

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the 1st accused in crime no.709/2022 of bedakam police station, which was registered for the offences punishable under sections 419 and 420 read with section 34 of the indian penal code.3. the prosecution case is that, accused nos.1 to 5made the defacto complainant believe that the 2 nd accused is an ips officer and he can arrange a loan of `2 crores from m/s. yes bank and thereby collected and amount of `12,40,000/- as processing charges for the same. thereafter, neither the loan was arranged nor the amount was refunded. the 2 nd accused was also not an ips officer as well. the crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted. :3 :4. heard sri. a. arun kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and sri. c.s. hritwik, the learned senior public prosecutor for the state.5. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner is innocent of all the allegations. apart from the fact that she introduced the 2nd accused to the defacto complainant, there is no involvement of the petitioner in commission of the crime. the entire amount was admittedly transferred to the account of the 2nd accused and the petitioner is in no way received any financial gains. the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court.6. on the other hand the learned public prosecutorwould oppose the aforesaid application by pointing out that there is an allegation against the petitioner to the effect that he falsely introduced the 2nd accused to the defacto complainant as an ips officer. besides the same, the petitioner is involved in another case of similar nature. the matter is under investigation and therefore dismissal of the application was sought. :4 :7. i have carefully gone through the records. it is evidentthat the accused persons have executed a well planned.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 155 OF 2023 CRIME NO.709/2022 OF BEDAKAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: SOLY JOSEPH AGED 46 YEARS DAUGHTER OF JOSEPH, RESIDING AT PULIKKAL HOUSE, PADUPPU, BANDADUKKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671541 BY ADVS. A.ARUNKUMAR HEERAKRISHNA T.H. SACHIN GEORGE ARAMBAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SRI. C.S. HRITWIK, SR. P.P. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 4th day of August, 2023 This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in crime No.709/2022 of Bedakam Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case is that, accused Nos.1 to 5

made the defacto complainant believe that the 2 nd accused is an IPS Officer and he can arrange a loan of `2 crores from M/s. Yes Bank and thereby collected and amount of `12,40,000/- as processing charges for the same. Thereafter, neither the loan was arranged nor the amount was refunded. The 2 nd accused was also not an IPS Officer as well. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted. :3 :

4. Heard Sri. A. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S. Hritwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. Apart from the fact that she introduced the 2nd accused to the defacto complainant, there is no involvement of the petitioner in commission of the crime. The entire amount was admittedly transferred to the account of the 2nd accused and the petitioner is in no way received any financial gains. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

6. On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor

would oppose the aforesaid application by pointing out that there is an allegation against the petitioner to the effect that he falsely introduced the 2nd accused to the defacto complainant as an IPS Officer. Besides the same, the petitioner is involved in another case of similar nature. The matter is under investigation and therefore dismissal of the application was sought. :4 :

7. I have carefully gone through the records. It is evident

that the accused persons have executed a well planned strategy for extracting amounts from the defacto complainant. The role of the petitioner is prima facie established and therefore it is a matter to be investigated. The fact that the petitioner was also involved in another case of similar nature also cannot be ignored. In such circumstances, when taking note of the aforesaid aspects, I do not find this as a fit case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner has to cooperate with the investigation by making herself for interrogation. In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of three weeks from today, for subjecting herself to interrogation.

(ii) Upon such surrender and after interrogation, if any,

the petitioner shall be produced by the investigating officer before the Jurisdictional Court on the very same day of surrender itself to enable the petitioner to seek regular bail, provided the petitioner surrenders on or before 10.30.a.m on that day.

(iii) The Jurisdictional Court, upon production of the petitioner/accused and filing of a bail application, may :5 : consider the bail application in accordance with the law and, if possible, dispose of the same on the very same day of filing the said application.

Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ncd :6 : APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 155/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure AI A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.709 OF 2022 OF BEDAKAM POLICE STATION

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Soly Joseph vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.