High Court Kerala High Court

K.Babu vs State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.Babu vs State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6739 of 2008()


1. K.BABU, S/O. KARUNAKARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE HOUSE OFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.DILIP MOHAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :05/11/2008

 O R D E R
                              K.HEMA, J.

                  -----------------------------------------
                         B.A.No. 6739 of 2008
                  -----------------------------------------

                Dated this the 5th November, 2008

                               O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420 and 34 of the

Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, deposits were

received from de facto complainant by accused 1 to 3 promising to

pay high interest. But, neither the interest was paid nor the amount

was returned and thereby de facto complainant was cheated by

accused 1 to 3.

3. Petitioner is the second accused in the crime. Learned

counsel for petitioner submitted that he is not even a partner of the

firm as revealed from the partnership deed which is produced

herewith.

4. Petitioner is a practising Advocate and he has nothing to

do with the business. But, he has been implicated only to coerce the

other accused to pay money. If anticipatory bail is not granted, it is

likely that he will be remanded to custody and hence, this petition is

filed for anticipatory bail.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that an

action council was constituted by the political parties to settle the

issues. The first accused sold certain properties and raised Rs.1.5

BA.6739/08 2

crores for distribution to various creditors and the said money was

entrusted with the action council in December, 2007. but, the said

amount was not distributed among the creditors and hence,

complaints after complaints are being filed. The petitioner is facing

threat of arrest and detention of such cases filed by various

creditors. However, in an earlier application for anticipatory bail

filed by accused 1 and 2, this Court granted anticipatory bail as per

order dated 21.10.2008 in B.A.No.6455 of 2008.

6. Taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances, this

court while granting anticipatory bail to accused 1 and 2 also

directed that the accused shall take necessary steps before the

respective courts for reference of the cases to Lok Adalat, after

giving notice to the action council. It was also observed by this

Court in the order that if any application is filed for reference, the

case shall be referred and posted beore the Lok Adalat without any

bail. Learned Sessions Judge was also directed to ensure that all

such cases are posted before the Lok Adalat which was presided

over by a competent senior judicial officer of the district.

7. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that first

accused is prepared to settle the whole issue and he is taking steps

to see that the cases are referred to the Lok Adalat for amicable

settlement by impleading the action council also, it is submitted. He

BA.6739/08 3

is also taking all steps possible to raise money and see that all

creditors are paid the amount due. He could not pay the money only

due to peculiar circumstances and the accused had no intention to

cheat any person and no offence under Section 420 IPC strictly

going by the language of the Section, it is submitted. It is also

submitted that steps are being taken for reference of this case to

the Lok Adalat for settlement and that some cases are also referred

to the Lok Adalat and it is pending consideration before the Lok

Adalat.

8. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that on consideration

of the facts and circumstances, this Court had granted anticipatory

bail in similar case to the co-accused. It is also submitted that this

is a fit case to be referred to the Lok Adalat for settling the issues

and hence he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the

petitioner, especially since willingness is shown by the co-accused

to pay off all the debt by entrusting the amount to the action council

as early as in 2007.

9. On hearing both sides, considering the peculiar facts and

circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the

willingness shown to pay off the debt etc., I find that anticipatory

bail can be granted to the petitioner on conditions.

BA.6739/08 4

Hence, the following order is passed:

Petitioner shall surrender before the

investigating officer within seven days from today and

in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on bail

on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two

solvent sureties each for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the arresting officer on the following

conditions:

            i)      Petitioner shall co-operate with the

                    investigation.

            ii)     Petitioner  shall  report   before   the

                    investigating  officer  as   and   when

                    directed.

     Petition is allowed.




                                  K.HEMA, JUDGE

vgs.