IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 7235 of 2007()
1. RAJASEKHARAN.K.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SASINDRAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :03/12/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A.No. 7235 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces
allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 406
I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he,
in his capacity as the Treasurer of the Kannur District Cherukida
Bus Operators Association, misappropriated the funds of the
association, which came into his hands and used it for purposes
which were not legal or authorised. It is alleged that he had
collected amounts from the members towards repayment of the
loan availed in the name of the members, but the amounts were
not paid into that account and were used for expenses of a Trust.
There is a further allegation that service charge of Rs. 5.5 lakhs
collected from the members were not brought into the accounts
of the association and were used by the petitioner for his personal
purposes. There is yet another allegation that eventhough the
B.A.No. 7235 of 2007
2
petitioner was given opportunity to undo the mischief and make
amends for his conduct, he did not avail of that opportunity also.
Crime has been registered on the basis of the complaint made to the
Superintendent of Police by the present office bearers of the
association. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends
imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is absolutely innocent. Allegations are being raised
vexatiously against him on account of a rift between the members of
the association. It is not a case where the petitioner had
misappropriated the amounts. The amounts collected were used for the
purposes in connection with the activities of the association. In these
circumstances it is prayed that the petitioner may be granted
anticipatory bail.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Prosecutor. The case diary has been placed before me for my perusal.
The definite case of the petitioner appears to be that the amounts had
come into his hands. It had not been used for the purposes for which it
B.A.No. 7235 of 2007
3
was earmarked, but it was used for other purposes which had nexus
with the activities of the association.
4. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussion on merit about
the acceptability of the allegations raised or the credibility of the data
collected. Suffice it to say that at the moment and with the available
inputs I am unable to accept the contentions raised by the learned
counsel for the petitioner. I am satisfied that there are no features in
this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary
equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the
petitioner. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case
where the petitioner must surrender before the Investigator or the
learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the
ordinary course. The petitioner shall be entitled to urge all his
contentions before the learned Magistrate when the application for
regular bail is considered by the learned Magistrate. He shall be at
liberty to produce all the documents before the learned Magistrate in
support of his contentions.
B.A.No. 7235 of 2007
4
5. This application is dismissed with the above
observations.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm