The judgment establishes that bail may be granted even in serious allegations when the accused demonstrates cooperation with the investigation and has health concerns, with conditions to mitigate potential risks.

O R D E R

[ Bail Appl..1207/2021, Bail Appl..1208/2021, Bail Appl..1209/2021, Bail Appl..1210/2021, Bail Appl..1211/2021, Bail Appl..1302/2021, Bail Appl..1303/2021, Bail Appl..1304/2021, Bail Appl..1305/2021, Bail Appl..1306/2021, Bail Appl..1307/2021, Bail Appl..1308/2021, Bail Appl..1309/2021, Bail Appl..1391/2021 ] Dated this the 5th day of February 2021 Applications for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

The applicant is the accused in the aforesaid crimes of SMS (Special Mobile Squad) Police Station, Kasargod. That apart he has also been implicated as an accused in 85 other crimes. The offences punishable are under Sections 406 , 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC , Section 5 of the Kerala Protection of Interests of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act , 2013 (for short "the Financial Act") and under Section 3 read with of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act , 2019 (for short the BUDS Act ').

2. The prosecution case pertains to complaints filed by different depositors for having lost their money deposited with a company named 'Fashion Gold International Private Limited,'

Cheruvatoor and its sister concerns, of which the applicant who is a member of the legislative assembly, is a Chairman. The allegation of the prosecution is that several gullible persons were induced to deposit money in the concerns belonging to the accused persons and all those amounts were dishonestly misappropriated by them and the poor depositors were cheated. The applicant being an MLA and holding an important position in a political party, wielded huge influence on these gullible investors and they relied upon his assurance that the money would be safe with the financial institutions of which he was the Chairman.

3. The applicant contends that he is innocent and the allegations are not true. He was only a name lender for the company as a Chairman. The companies were run by the other accused and the applicant being an MLA, was mainly stationed in Thiruvananthapuram and visited his native village only for the purpose of the welfare of his subjects. The applicant states that he has no other criminal antecedents apart from these cases which have been registered against him. He has not been actively participating in the affairs of the company, even though there is some evidence regarding his attending the meeting of the companies and the sister concerns. The earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court mainly for the reason that it is an economic fraud and therefore the applicant is not entitled to bail at the nascent stage, where the investigating agency will have to be given more time to delve deep into the alleged act of misappropriation by the accused.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

5. It is submitted that the applicant has now been in custody for a fairly long time. The applicant has been subjected to custodial interrogation several times, and therefore, no purpose would be served by his further incarceration. It is also submitted that the applicant is suffering from ischemic heart disease, two- vessel disease and also suffering from type-2 diabetes mellitus. Detention in prison for a longer time would definitely affect his health. He has been cooperating with the investigation. The only apprehension expressed by this Court on the earlier occasion while dismissing the bail was that being an influential person and a political leader, the applicant may attempt to win over the witnesses and influence them if he is released on bail. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that any stringent conditions may be imposed in case he is released on bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor Sri.Suman Chakravarthy submits that the other accused is yet to be arrested. He is abroad and he could not be apprehended for that reason. In case the applicant is released on bail, he is likely to influence the witnesses or tamper with evidence, submits the learned pros