Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 21ST ASWINA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 545 OF 2021 CRIME NO.571/2020 OF MARADU POLICE STATION, Ernakulam PETITIONER/ACCUSED: JOSEMON SIMON AGED 38 YEARS KOONTHAMATTATHIL, UZHAVOOR, KOTTAYAM KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686634 BY ADV M.M.DEEPA RESPONDENTS/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 ADDL R2 MUHAMMED SAFEEN AGED 39 YEARS S/O ISMAIL, THE ART HOUSE, GANDHI NAGAR,CHAKKANTHARA PALAKKAD PIN 678006 IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2 AS PER
ORDER DATED 1/2/2021 IN CRL MA 1/2021
BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.ARUN CHANDRAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A. No. 545 of 2021 2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
------------------- B.A. No. 545 of 2021 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2022
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.571 of 2020 of Maradu Police Station, Ernakulam District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that the applicant
approached the defacto complainant in his flat at Grand Meadows in Kundannur, promising to make him a partner in the production of a Malayalam Movie and got transferred an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakh only) on 18.10.2018 in the account maintained in the name of Jayaraj Motion Pictures, and has failed to make him a partner, and thereby the accused committed the above said offences.
4. The petitioner submits that he has availed a loan from the defacto complainant for the purpose of
production of a Malayalam movie. His case is that B.A. No. 545 of 2021 3 he has paid advance to various technicians and actors. While the project was on the move, the defacto complainant fell seriously ill and the
applicant was informed that the defacto complainant underwent kidney transplantation. However,the applicant was ready to wait for the defacto complainant till he is back to normalcy, but the defacto complainant unilaterally withdrew from the
project putting the applicant to huge loss and untold miseries. Towards the loan availed by the petitioner a cheque was given and the same was dishonoured. The contention of the petitioner is
that he did not further initiate any proceedings regarding the same.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and counsel appearing for the defacto complainant.
6. The application for bail is seriously opposed by the defacto complainant, who entered appearance through counsel and that he has obtained Rs.15,00,000/- on a promise that he will be made a B.A. No. 545 of 2021 4
co-producer in the forthcoming movie, but the project was neither moved nor the amount was paid. It is seen that a 'not to arrest' order was issued in this case as early as on 15.01.2021 and the said order is still in force. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and nature of the allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be required for the purpose of investigation. I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but on
stringent conditions. Above bail application is
allowed with the following directions. The petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 19.10.2022 and make himself available for interrogation. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.571 of 2020 of Maradu Police Station, petitioner shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day and be released on bail on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the B.A. No. 545 of 2021 5 like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.571/2020 of Maradu Police Station as and when summoned to do so;
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever so required;
(iv) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence;
(iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(v) The Petitioner shall surrender his passport
before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days of release on bail;
(vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating Officer in Crime No.571/2020 of Maradu Police Station, may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail. B.A. No. 545 of 2021 6 It is made clear that it is within the power of
the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioner even when the petitioner is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663). sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM,JUDGE pm