High Court Kerala High Court

M.V.Mahamood vs State Of Kerala Rep.By S.I.Of … on 25 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
M.V.Mahamood vs State Of Kerala Rep.By S.I.Of … on 25 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4660 of 2008()


1. M.V.MAHAMOOD, AGED 49 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY S.I.OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :25/07/2008

 O R D E R
                                     K. HEMA, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                               B.A.No. 4660 of 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008

                                        O R D E R

Application for bail.

2. The alleged offences are under sections 120(b), 423, 465, 466,

467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474 and 476 read with section 34 IPC . According

to the prosecution, the petitioner supplied false documents, on the strength

of which, a loan was availed of by accused 1 and 2 to the tune of about

Rs.3 crores from a bank. Documents were forged in the name of fictitious

persons. The petitioner received Rs.60 lakhs as remuneration for the alleged

act committed by him.

3. This application is strongly opposed. The learned Public

Prosecutor submitted that crores of rupees are involved and the bank was

cheated by producing forged document. The crime was registered in 2007

and petitioner was not available for arrest for a long period and he was

arrested only on 26-3-2008. Accused 1 and 2 are not available for arrest.

Investigation can be completed only after the arrest of accused 1 and 2 and

investigation is at the preliminary stage. If the petitioner is released on bail

at this stage, it will adversely affect the investigation and it is also likely

BA 4660/2008 -2-

that the petitioner will tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses,

it is submitted.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the lower

court this application was not opposed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor

and it was submitted there that bail can be granted on conditions. It was also

submitted that the grounds stated by the court below for refusing the bail is

not sustainable and petitioner cannot be detained till the arrest of accused

1 and 2.

5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the release of the

petitioner, at this stage of investigation and in a nature of this crime, will

interfere with an effective investigation into the crime, since accused 1 and 2

who are the main culprits are not arrested so far.

The application is dismissed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

mn.