IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 6503 of 2007()
1. K.KUSHALAN, AGED 37 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.MADHU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :24/10/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
B.A.Nos.6503, 6504 & 6505 of 2007
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of October 2007
O R D E R
These applications by the common petitioner are for
anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under Section 409
I.P.C. These crimes have been registered on the basis of private
complaints filed by the complainants who are subscribers to
Sri.Vairajathan Kuries of which the petitioner was a collecting agent.
The crux of the allegations against the petitioner in all the three
complaints is that the amounts received from the subscribers though
acknowledged in the pass book issued to them are not remitted to the
accounts of the Vairajathan Kuries. It is alleged that an amount of
Rs.1,000/-, Rs.14,000/- and Rs.34,000/- remitted by the respective
subscribers have been misappropriated by the petitioner herein.
Investigation is pending. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is absolutely innocent. The Vairajathan Kuries has been
mis-managed by its proprietors. It is not a case of the petitioner not
remitting the amount; but it is a case of the Vairajathan Kuries not
maintaining proper accounts of the amounts remitted by its
subscribers.
B.A.No.6503/07 2
3. It is the petitioner’s case that he had received the amounts
and remitted the amounts to the Vairajathan Kuries. If the payments
are remitted to the account of Vairajathan Kuries maintained with the
Co-operative Bank, it is for the petitioner to satisfy the court that such
payments have been made. At the moment and with the available
inputs, I find absolutely no reason to assume that the allegations
raised against the petitioner are false and are raised vexatiously. I
am satisfied, in these circumstances, that it is not necessary to invoke
the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The
petitioner must appear before the investigating officer or the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction and seek regular bail in the ordinary
course.
4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, if
the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer or the
learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving sufficient prior
notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate
must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance
with law and expeditiously.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
B.A.No.6503/07 3
B.A.No.6503/07 4
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007