IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 4615 of 2007()
1. INDIRA K.P, AGED 50,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.M.SAJAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :31/07/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A. NO. 4615 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2007
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner – a
woman, faces allegations, inter alia, under Sec.420 of the IPC.
She had availed a loan from the Bank in 1996. She had
offered her property as security to the Bank. The loan has not
been discharged yet. While the loan liability was in existence
and the charge allegedly continued, the petitioner is alleged to
have transferred her rights in the property to the transferees
by a settlement deed. The transferees are closely related to
the petitioner. Such transferees have further transferred the
property also, it is urged.
2. The Bank has filed a complaint in 2007 before the
learned Magistrate raising the grievance that the Bank has
been cheated. The complaint has been forwarded to police for
investigation. A crime has been registered. Investigation is
B.A. NO. 4615 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
pending. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by
no stretch of imagination can it be held that the petitioner is
guilty of the offence of cheating against the Bank. The security
given to the Bank continues to be in force. The Bank’s remedy
to proceed against the property offered as security continues.
In these circumstances, how and in what manner can it be said
that the Bank has been cheated, he queries.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor was requested to explain.
The only submission of learned Public Prosecutor is that the
liability has not been discharged yet. The transfer documents do
not refer to the anterior charge in favour of the Bank. From
these, it is contended that Bank has been cheated. For the laity
this may be called cheating; but the ingredients of the offence of
cheating in criminal law are certainly not there. In these
circumstances, I am of opinion that the petitioner’s prayer for
anticipatory bail deserves to be considered favourably.
5. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following
directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 7/8/07. She shall be
released on regular bail on her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-
B.A. NO. 4615 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction
of the learned Magistrate.
(ii) The petitioner shall make herself available for
interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m.
and 1 p.m. on 8/8/07 and thereafter as and when directed by
the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.
(iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned
Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall
thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to
arrest the petitioner and deal with her in accordance with law as
if those directions were not issued at all;
(iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to her surrender
on 7/8/07 as directed in clause (i) above, she shall be released on
her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties
undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 7/8/07.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
B.A. NO. 4615 OF 2007 -: 4 :-