Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 24TH BHADRA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 CRIME NO.750/2022 OF Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 2 & 4:
1 LAZAR, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.POULOSE @ POULOTH, PULLOOKKARA HOUSE,CHALAKUDY DESOM,KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307. 2 SHERLY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O LAZAR, PULLOOKKARA HOUSE, CHALAKUDY DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE,CHALAKUDY TALUK, CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307. 3 JINOOP LAZAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. LAZER PULLOOKKARA HOUSE, CHALAKUDY DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY TALUK, CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, , PIN - 680307. BY ADV V.SANDHYA VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE S.I OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY P.O., PIN -680 307 REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307 3 NIXON VERGHESE, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. VERGHESE, PULLOKKARAN HOUSE, CHOWKA DESOM, ELINJIPRA VILLAGE, ELINJIPRA P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, , PIN - 680721 BY ADVS. Prabhu K.N MANUMON A.(K/000280/2003) JAYAN KUTTICHAKKU(K/356/2002) PP SRI.M.C.ASHI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 2 VIJU ABRAHAM, J BA No. 6611 of 2022 th Dated this the 15 day of September 2022
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution allegation is that after having agreed
to sell the property in the ownership of accused No.1 & 2 and obtained an amount of Rs.1 Crore 73 Lakhs as advance, failed to register the sale deed and also failed to return the advance amount and thus defrauded the complainant and when the amount was asked to be returned, he was threatened over phone, and thus the accused committed the alleged offence.
4. The case of the petitioners is that first petitioner is an aged person with serious ailments and now he is worst
affected by stroke and undergoing treatment. Towards the treatment and other medical expenses, first petitioner had several financial/loan transactions with respondent No.3. Second BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 3 petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner and third petitioner is their son. At the time of availing financial assistance from respondent No.3, the first petitioner had to hand over several signed but blank papers, Stamp papers and Cheques as security for the loan as insisted by him. Petitioners No.1 and 2, left with no options, had to hand over those documents as security to avail the financial assistance/loan in such a pressing situation, otherwise the medical treatment of the first petitioner would have been disrupted. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. The case of the petitioners is that towards the treatment and other medical expenses, first petitioner had several financial/loan transactions with respondent No.3 and several documents have been given
as security for the same. The amount could not be returned back as agreed. Third respondent as an alternative insisted for assigning the property owned and possessed by the first
petitioner in his name to which the petitioners were not willing. The further case of the petitioners is that document was created as Annexure-A1 which is an agreement for sale of the property. Thereafter, a suit was filed as OS.No.175/2022 BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 4 before the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Irinjalakuda for return of advance amount on the basis of Annnexure-A1 document and the third respondent has moved an interim application for attachment of immovable property as Annexure-A3. A complaint was also filed, upon which Annexure-A4 crime has been registered.
5. The application was seriously opposed by the defacto complainant who appeared through counsel and submitted that the petitioners have practically admitted the allegations in the
complaint and therefore they are not entitled for a
discretionary remedy from this court.
6. It is seen that petitioners 1 and 2 are aged 65 and58 respectively and they have no other criminal antecedents. Considering the nature of the allegations, I feel that custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be required for the purpose of investigation. Petitioners submitted that they are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation.
7. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations and taking into consideration that the petitioners have no other criminal antecedents, I am BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 5
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In the result, this application is allowed. Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of
Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, on 22.09.2022 at 11 am and make available themselves for interrogation. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, they shall be produced before the Jurisdictional Court on the same day and shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court,
(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, as and when called for,
(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to influence the defacto complainant or interfere BAIL APPL. NO. 6611 OF 2022 6 with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District,
(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
investigating officer in Crime No.750/2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thirssur District, may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail. 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 petitioners even when the petitioners are 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 R.AV