Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3639 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: PRIYANKUMAR AGED 36 YEARS PAROOPARAMBIL HOUSE, PAROOPARAMBU COLONY, IRUMPANAM, THIRUVANKULAM, NOW RESIDING AT 16-459, MANASI HOUSE, NADAKKAVU, UDAYAMPEROOR, MANANKUNNAM ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682307 BY ADVS. ANOOP JOSEPH SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR SMT.ZERENE LINDA MITCHEL SMT.ASWANI THUVVAKKADAN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SMT.M K PUSHPALATHA,PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3739/2021, AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3739 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: DHANYA AGED 33 YEARS VAVA SADANAM HOUSE, PANMANA KARA, KANNAKKARA BHAGAM, VADAKUMTHARA VILLAGE, CHAVARA KOLLAM DISTRICT KOLLAM, PIN - 691583 BY ADVS. MUHAMMED YASIL SRI.KARTHIK BHAVADASAN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,SMT M K PUSHPALATHA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3794 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: ASHRAF ALI, AGED 32 YEARS, 32, HAJI MUHAMMED STREET, KOTTAI, COIMBATORE SOUTH, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU., PIN - 641001 BY ADVS. M.V.VIPINDAS, SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H., SMT.K.S.SMITHA, SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR, SMT.S.UMA DEVI, SMT.N.P.SILPA RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 2 SHO UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE STATION STATION HOUSE OFFICER, UDAYAPEROOR POLICE STATION, UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: SMT. V.SREEJA,PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -4-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3795 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: SAYED SULTHAN, AGED 32 YEARS 3RD VEEDHI, CHELLAPPAPURAM, TIRUPPUR, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 641504 BY ADVS. M.V.VIPINDAS, SRI.G.HARIHARAN, SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.K.S.SMITHA, SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR SMT.S.UMA DEVI, SMT.N.P.SILPA RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 2 SHO UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE STATION, STATION HOUSE OFFICER, UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE STATION, UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682307 OTHER PRESENT: SMT. M.K.PUSHPALATHA,SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl.3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -5-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3842 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: RISHAD, AGED 30 YEARS, S.O IBRAHIMKUTTY, STRRET NO. 3.28, KARUMBODUKADUPPALLY STREET, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU, PIN - 641008 BY ADVS. A.HAROON RASHEED SMT.RAIHANATH T.H. RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: SMT.V.SREEJA,PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -6-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3865 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: ASRUDHEEN, AGED 29 YEARS, S.O SALUDHEEN, HOUSE NO 64, WARD 94, VASANTH NAGAR, STREET 1-KARUPRIYAN KOVIL, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 641005 BY ADV V.A.VINOD RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA,SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -7-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3936 OF 2021 CRIME NO.160 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: RASHEED, AGED 40 YEARS, SEENA MANZIL, MANATHALA BEACH,CHAVAKKAD,KERALA, PIN-680506., PIN - 680506 BY ADV M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SMT.V.SREEJA,PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.05.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3639/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -8-
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos.1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 in Crime No.160 of 2021 of Udayamperoor Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 489A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 489E and 201 read with Section 34 IPC. 2 The prosecution allegation can be briefly stated thus:-
Eighty six counterfeit notes having denomination of Rs.2,000/- each were found in possession of the 1st accused on 28.3.2021. The prosecution allegation is that the 1 st accused obtained the above counterfeit notes from accused Nos.5 and 6. It is further alleged that the 7 th accused introduced accused Nos.1 and 4 to accused Nos.5 and 6, who supplied fake notes for Rs.2,10,000/- after collecting original currency
-9-
notes for Rs.1,25,000/-. The allegation against the 2nd accused is that the 2nd accused received 20 numbers of counterfeit notes, each note having a denomination of Rs.2,000/- each from the 1 st accused. The 4th accused accompanied the 1st accused to the house of accused Nos.5 and 6 for collecting the counterfeit notes. The machinery and the accessories for printing the fake notes were recovered from the house of the 8th accused. The 9th accused was the helper of the 8th accused. Accused Nos.10, 11 and 12 were the mediators. Fake notes to the tune of Rs.1,78,36,000/- had been recovered from a motor bike in which accused Nos.5 and 6 were travelling.
3. The above case was registered on the basis of the information given by the bank, when the 1 st accused approached the bank for getting back the fake note which he attempted to deposit in a CDM of the bank. -10-
4. Accused Nos.1 to 2 were arrested on 28.3.2021. Accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 were arrested on 21.4.2021 and accused Nos.8 and 9 were arrested on 22.4.2021 and ever since, they have been in custody.
5. The applications for regular bail filed by the petitioners were dismissed by the court vide separate orders.
6. Heard the learned Advocates for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutors.
7. Accused Nos.3, 4, 10 and 12 were already granted bail by the Court after their arrest and judicial detention.
8. The learned counsel for the 1 st accused has requested for granting bail mainly on medical ground due to the present pandemic situation.
9. The learned counsel for the 2nd accused has submitted that the 2nd accused had accepted the notes given -11-
by the 1st accused on the reason that the 2 nd accused was the close relative of the 1st accused and that she was not having the knowledge that the said notes were counterfeit notes.
10. The learned counsel for the 5th accused has submitted that the 5th accused has been in custody for more than one month and hence, he is entitled to be granted bail.
11. The learned counsel for the 6th accused has argued that since no recovery was effected from the 6 th accused, the 6th accused is entitled to be granted bail.
12. The learned counsel for the 7th accused has
submitted that no recovery of fake note was effected from the 7th accused and that the criminal antecedent alleged against the 7th accused was in relation to an offence committed in the year 2017. Therefore, he has requested for granting bail.
13. The learned counsel for the 8th accused has argued that the house from which the recovery was allegedly effected did not belong to the 8 th accused and that -12-
the 8th accused was not residing in the said house. It has been further argued that the parents of the 8 th accused are residing in the said house and that the 8 th accused is residing in his wife's house along with his pregnant wife and hence, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail, particularly when no counterfeit note was recovered from him.
14. The learned counsel for the 9th accused has argued that there is no material to connect the 9 th accused with the offence alleged and hence, the 9 th accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
15. The prosecution allegation is that the 1 st accused
received counterfeit notes for Rs.2,10,000/- from accused Nos.5 and 6 after giving original currency notes for Rs.1,25,000/-. The recovery was also effected from the 1 st
accused. Since there are materials to connect the 1 st accused primafacie with the commission of the offence, the release of the 1st accused on bail at this stage is likely to adversely affect the progress of the investigation of the case, as the investigation is only at the infancy stage. In view of the above, the request for granting bail by the 1 st
-13- accused relying on the present pandemic situation, cannot be accepted.
16. The recovery of an amount of Rs.1,78,36,000/-
was allegedly effected from the bag carried by the 5 th accused while accused Nos.5 and 6 were proceeding in a bike. In view of the above, it cannot be said that there is no material to primafacie connect accused Nos.5 and 6 with the commission of the offence. In the said circumstances, the argument advanced by the 6th accused, that no seizure was effected from the 6th accused, cannot also be accepted. That apart, the involvement of accused Nos.5 and 6, if any, in other crimes is also to be investigated, as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. Since the investigation is only at the beginning stage, it is not safe to release accused Nos.5 and 6 on bail at this stage.
17. The machinery and the accessories were
allegedly recovered from the house of the 8 th accused. Whether the 8th accused was residing in the said house or not will be revealed only in the course of investigation. -14-
Suffice it to say that there is allegation that the 8 th accused had taken an active role in the commission of the offence and that it was only in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy that he kept the machinery and the accessories for printing fake notes in his residential house. Prima facie materials are available to connect the 8 th accused with the
commission of the offence. Since there are materials to prima facie show that the 8th accused had taken a considerable role in the commission of the offence, it is not safe to release the 8th accused on bail at this stage as his release on bail at this stage would adversely affect the progress of investigation.
18. It is true that no recovery was effected from the 7 th
accused. However, the prosecution allegation is that the 7 th accused introduced the 1st accused to accused Nos.5 and 6. He also helped the 1st accused to get the counterfeit notes from accused nos.5 and 6. He also helped in ascertaining the quality etc. of the notes and the machinery. There are also materials to show that the 7th accused helped the other
-15-
accused for purchasing the machinery and the accessories for printing the counterfeit notes. Therefore, the nonrecovery of any counterfeit note from the 7 th accused has no significance at all, particularly when the investigation is going on in respect of the allegation that he circulated the counterfeit notes. The 7th accused was also involved in another offence of similar nature committed in the year
2017. Since the 7th accused is involved in another offence
of similar nature, there is likelihood that he will repeat similar offences, if he is released on bail at this stage. That apart, since the investigation is only at the infancy stage, it is not safe to release the 7th accused on bail at this stage.
19. The 2nd accused is admittedly the cousin of the wife of the 1st accused. There is no allegation by the prosecution to the effect that the 2nd accused had the mens
rea to possess the counterfeit notes. The 2 nd accused is a close relative of the 1st accused. The 2 nd accused is also not involved in any other offence of similar nature.
20. No recovery was effected from the 9 th accused. -16- The prosecution allegation is that the 9 th accused helped the 8th accused to get the machinery and the accessories.
However, no material is available to connect the 9 th accused primafacie with the commission of the offence, particularly when no recovery was also effected from the 9th accused. The 9th accused is also not having any criminal antecedent. In view of the above, the further detention of the 9th accused is not necessary for the progress of the investigation of the case.
21. For the reasons stated above, the bail applications filed by accused Nos.1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are liable to be dismissed and the bail applications filed by accused Nos.2 and 9 are liable to be allowed. In the result, Bail Application Nos.3639, 3795, 3794,
3936 and 3865 of 2021 stand dismissed and Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 stand allowed and the petitioners in Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 shall be enlarged on bail, on condition of each of the -17- the petitioners in Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court and subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners in Bail Application
Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for six months and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.
(ii) The petitioners in Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 shall not get involved in any other offence of similar nature during the pendency of this case.
(iii) The petitioners in Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation. -18-
(iv) The petitioners in Bail Application Nos.3739 and 3842 of 2021 shall not leave the State of Kerala, without the permission of the jurisdictional court until further orders. Sd/ B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE. dl/