SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 39994

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
R. SATISH CHANDRAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./1810/2022



Advocates:
J.G.SYAMNATH S.ANEESH

Anticipatory bail can be granted even in serious charges if the accused shows willingness to cooperate and there are precedents supporting such granting.

Headnote:

Bail - Anticipatory Bail - Indian Penal Code Sections 409, 420, 421 - Granting anticipatory bail under conditions to ease defendants' cooperation with the investigation while balancing the severity of the allegations.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Director of 'Grahachand Nidhi Ltd,' was accused of cheating defacto complainants by promising high returns on fixed deposits but failing to refund them. The prosecution filed multiple complaints leading to several FIRs.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner had no direct role in the alleged misappropriations. Considering his willingness to cooperate and similar previous grants of bail, the court decided to allow anticipatory bail.

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted considering the allegations of cheating under the IPC and the petitioner's involvement in the crimes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted that while serious allegations exist, the petitioner showed readiness to cooperate with the investigation and previously similar cases warranted granting bail.

Final Decision: Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions.

ORDER

These are the applications for anticipatory bail.

2. Petitioner in all these bail applications are one and the same person. He is is the accused in Crime Nos. 2109 of 2019,1753 of 2019, 2106 of 2019, 2108 of 2019,1919 of 2019, 1856 of 2019, 1920 of 2019, 2107 of 2019, 1921 of 2019, 1852 of 2019, 2105 of 2019, 1754 of 2019, 1748 of 2019, 1857 of 2019, 1749 of 2019, 1853 of 2019 and 1918 of 2019 of Thiruvalla Police Station alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 409 , 420, 421 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner in his capacity as the Director of “Grahachand Nidhi Ltd” had criminally conspired with the other Directors of the company in order to cheat the defacto complainants with intent to make profits induced the defacto complainants by offering more interest in the fixed deposit scheme of the company. Accordingly, the defacto complainants made deposits with the company. It was promised that the deposits on attaining maturity will be refunded with the prescribed interest rates. However, the Managing Director and the other Directors of the company failed to comply with the promises and thereby cheated the defacto complainants. These allegations led to the filing of the above complaints against the petitioner and the other accused persons which further led to the registration of the FIR registered with Crime No.2109 of 2019 and other crimes referred above of Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta District.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has been implicated in all the crimes. These crimes are registered on the basis of complaints laid by the various defacto complainants. The case of the petitioner is that initially there is a company by name “Kerala Housing Finance Ltd” which was established in the year 1992 while the petitioner was appointed in the said establishment and later promoted as branch manager. While so, in 2015, the Managing Director of the said establishment took a decision to start a new company by name “Grahachand Nidhi Ltd” and the petitioner was working as a Director in the said company. The case of the petitioner is that the Managing Director of the “Kerala Housing Finance Ltd” and her husband received public deposits by promising more interest other than the scheduled banks and they siphoning of funds from “Grahachand Nidhi Ltd, to other unknown accounts. Not even a single board meeting was convened. Apprehending misappropriations and malfunctioning, the petitioner decided to resign from the post and in 2017, he intimated the Registrar of Companies regarding his resignation. Petitioner submitted that he has no role in the alleged transactions. Petitioner further submitted that in similar cases this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the accused therein, who were also similarly situated that of the petitioner herein. A perusal of Annexure-3 order reveals that petitioners therein were also working at various branches of the establishment. They were also made Directors in the newly organised company namely “Grahachand Nidhi Ltd”. Petitioner submitted that he is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation.

6. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In the result, these applications are allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in the abovesaid crimes of Thiruvalla Police Station subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees one lakh only) in each crimes with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in all the abovesaid crimes of Thiruvalla Police Station on every Saturday at

11.00 am for a period of three months.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top