Mathew K. James vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Oct 01, 2021

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1607821

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/1607821
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.
Decided On: Oct 01, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./1861/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mathew K. James

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....paravur police station registered for the offences punishable under section 406 and 420 of the indian penal code, this petitioner has moved this application for pre-arrest bail.2. the petitioner is a contractor engaged with construction works.the defacto complainant has entrusted the petitioner the construction of a villa in her property. a sum of rs.38,90,000/- was entrusted to the petitioner. but he did not complete the work as promised and has also failed to return the amount. thereby he has cheated her and a case has been registered at the instance of the defacto complainant.3. when this bail application was moved by the petitioner therewas a submission from the side of the petitioner that he is ready to pay the amount received by him to the defacto complainant and the matter could be settled if referred to the mediation centre. accepting the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned counsel for the defacto complainant the case was referred to the high court mediation centre at ernakulam. due to the intervention of the bail appl. no. 1861 of 2021 4 mediator an agreement was entered between the parties as dispute was settled. thereby, the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of rs.45 lakhs to the defacto complainant by way of 6 instalments.4. the said agreement was executed between the parties on 29.3.2021. as there was a mediation talk there was also an interimorder not to arrest the petitioner till date. but after entering into theagreement between the parties, he had paid only rs.17,00,000/- as part of the settlement and the balance amount is due. on the last posting date, ie; on 24.8.2021 the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to covid-19 he was facing some financial crisis and so he could not pay the balance amount but ready to pay the amount. but he wants some more time to effect the payment. as there was no objection from the side of the defacto complainant, time was granted to the petitioner to pay the.....

Full Judgment

BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 (CRIME NO.694 OF 2020 OF NORTH PARUR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: MATHEW K. JAMES AGED 33 YEARS S/O. RAJAN MATHEW, KUNNUMPURATH HOUSE, KOOTHRAPPALLY P.O., KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM, PIN 686 540. KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686540 BY ADVS. THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SMT.V.T.LITHA SMT.K.R.MONISHA SMT.SHRUTHI SARA JACOB SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.M.F.MOHAMMOD SIYAD RESPONDENT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 ADDL.R2 SAREENA RIYAZUDDIN FLAT NO. A1, BLOCK 2, S.M.S HABITAT, K.P. VALLON ROAD, KOCHU KADAVANTHRA 682 020 IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 4/3/2021 IN CRL MA 1/2021 BY ADVS. BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR M.RAMESH CHANDER (SR.) SRI.BALU TOM SRI.BONNY BENNY SHRI. BEJOY JOSEPH P.J. SRI. MANU.P.G- SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 3

ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.694 of 2021 of North Paravur police station registered for the offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, this petitioner has moved this application for pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner is a contractor engaged with construction works.

The defacto complainant has entrusted the petitioner the construction of a villa in her property. A sum of Rs.38,90,000/- was entrusted to the petitioner. But he did not complete the work as promised and has also failed to return the amount. Thereby he has cheated her and a case has been registered at the instance of the defacto complainant.

3. When this bail application was moved by the petitioner there

was a submission from the side of the petitioner that he is ready to pay the amount received by him to the defacto complainant and the matter could be settled if referred to the mediation centre. Accepting the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned counsel for the defacto complainant the case was referred to the High Court Mediation Centre at Ernakulam. Due to the intervention of the BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 4 mediator an agreement was entered between the parties as dispute was settled. Thereby, the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.45 lakhs to the defacto complainant by way of 6 instalments.

4. The said agreement was executed between the parties on 29.3.2021. As there was a mediation talk there was also an interim

order not to arrest the petitioner till date. But after entering into the

agreement between the parties, he had paid only Rs.17,00,000/- as part of the settlement and the balance amount is due. On the last posting date, ie; on 24.8.2021 the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to Covid-19 he was facing some financial crisis and so he could not pay the balance amount but ready to pay the amount. But he wants some more time to effect the payment. As there was no objection from the side of the defacto complainant, time was granted to the petitioner to pay the balance amount as agreed to be paid by him before the mediator. But till date nothing has been paid and now today also the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is unable to pay the amount.

5. The interim order was granted by this court only because there

was a chance to settle the matter in mediation as agreed to by the BAIL APPL. NO. 1861 OF 2021 5 parties. On going through the materials available before me, it could be seen that there is a strong prima facie cas against this petitioner. When such a case is there against the petitioner and he failed to pay the amount as agreed to before the mediator as per the report accepted by this court, I think that there is no justification to extend the interim

order as well to pass an order of pre-arrest bail as requested by the

petitioner. Therefore, this application stands dismissed. Sd/- SHIRCY V. JUDGE smm

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties Mathew K. James vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.