Abdul Rasheed vs State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1639262
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnMay-31-2021
Case NumberBail Appl./3893/2021
JudgeHonourable Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V
AppellantAbdul Rasheed
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
bail appl. no. 3893 of 2021 1in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice raja vijayaraghavan v monday, the 31st day of may 2021 / 10th jyaishta, 1943 bail appl. no. 3893 of 2021 petitioner/s: abdul rasheed aged 58 years m.p. house, edattummal, trikaripur, po. trikaripur, hosdurg taluk,kasaragod district kasargod, pin - 671310 by adv s.s.aravind respondent/s: state of kerala represented by public prosecutor,high court of kerala ernakulam, pin - 682031 ajith murali- public prosecutor this bail application having come up for admission on 31.05.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following: bail appl. no. 3893 of 2021 2orderthis application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure is by the accused in crime no.225 of 2021 of the chandera police station registered under section 420 of the ipc . the crime was registered based on a complaint filed by the de facto complaint before the learned magistrate which was forwarded to the police under section 156(3) of the cr pc.2. the prosecution allegation is that the petitioner persuaded the defacto complainant to part with a sum of rs.17,00,000/- for commencing a hotel business and thereafter failed to share the profit with him or to return the money.3. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of all allegations. he would further contend that no serious injuries were sustained by the victim.4. the learned public prosecutor has opposed the prayer.5. i have considered the submissions and have carefully evaluated the records. it does not appear from the records that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for an effective investigation in the instant case. in the result, this application will stand allowed, however, the same shall be subject to the following conditions. the applicant shall appearbail appl. no. 3893 of 2021 3 before the investigating officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:i) the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating officer on all saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. ii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts ofthe case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such factsto the court or to any police officer. iii) he shall not commit any similar offence while on bail. in case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. sd/- raja vijayaraghavan v judge ns
Judgment:

BAIL APPL. NO. 3893 OF 2021 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2021 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3893 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: ABDUL RASHEED AGED 58 YEARS M.P. HOUSE, EDATTUMMAL, TRIKARIPUR, PO. TRIKARIPUR, HOSDURG TALUK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT KASARGOD, PIN - 671310 BY ADV S.S.ARAVIND RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 AJITH MURALI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 3893 OF 2021 2

ORDER

This application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is by the accused in Crime No.225 of 2021 of the Chandera Police Station registered under Section 420 of the IPC . The crime was registered based on a complaint filed by the de facto complaint before the learned Magistrate which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Cr PC.

2. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner persuaded the de

facto complainant to part with a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- for commencing a hotel business and thereafter failed to share the profit with him or to return the money.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of all allegations. He would further contend that no serious injuries were sustained by the victim.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

5. I have considered the submissions and have carefully evaluated the records. It does not appear from the records that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for an effective investigation in the instant case. In the result, this application will stand allowed, however, the same shall be subject to the following conditions. The applicant shall appear

BAIL APPL. NO. 3893 OF 2021 3 before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

i) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of

the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts

to the court or to any police officer. iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE NS