Sabarinath vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
Sabarinath vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2009




Bail Appl..No. 1029 of 2009()

                      ...  Petitioner


                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :26/03/2009

 O R D E R
                         V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                  Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009

                      Dated: 31-03-2009


In these petitions filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the

common petitioner who is the first accused in CBCID Crime

Nos. 231/CR/Tvpm/08 and 223/CR/Tvpm/08 respectively,

seeks his enlargement on bail. He was arrested in connection

with Crime No. 169/CR/Tvpm/08 on 1-9-2008. His formal

arrest in these two cases was recorded on 27-1-2009.

2. In Crime No. 231/CR/Tvpm/08 the offences involved

are those punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 415, 418

and 420 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. In Crime No.

223/CR/Tvpm/08 the offences involved are those punishable

under Sections 120B, 406, 409 and 420 read with Sec. 34


3. The case of the prosecution in Crime No.

231/CR/Tvpm/08 is as follows:-

A1 (Sabarinath-the petitioner herein) with the assistance

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:2:-

of his father (Rajan) (A4) started an establishment by name

Nest Investment Solutions in Mundakkal Arcade near Medical

College, Thiruvananthapuram on 30-04-2007. The said

establishment was got registered with the Registrar of Firms

at Vanchiyoor on 13-09-2007. Subsequently under the cover

of the said establishment certain sister concerns by name “I

Nest” at West Fort, Tatal 4 You at Capital Centre, Statue and

S.J.R. Group at Palayam in Thiruvananthapuram were also

started by them. A2 (Bindu Mahesh) was the Manager , A5

(Rahul) was the business Development Officer and A6 (Sanal)

was the sales staff in Nest Investment Solutions. A7 (Bindu

Suresh) and A8 (Adheela Beevi) were holding managerial

posts in the sister concerns and A3 (Hemalatha) was looking

after the accounts in the aforementioned concerns. On 24-12-

2007, A2 Bindu Mahesh and A7 Bindu Suresh had entered

into an agreement with A1 Sabarinath to fetch deposits worth

Rs. 30,00,000/- per month. Pursuant to the criminal

conspiracy hatched by the accused, prospective investors

were allured by holding out promises that the establishment

run by A1 had the permission from the NBFC-ND of the

Reserve bank of India and that interest rates higher than other

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:3:-

similar establishments were being paid since deposit amounts

were invested in commodities and shares and that the

depositors would be getting insurance coverage from Met Life

Insurance Company. On 12-7-2008 the de facto complainant

Jayanthan was induced to invest a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-, a

further sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 27-8-2008 and another sum

of Rs. 1,5 lakhs on 8-8-2008. Consequent on the breach of

promise committed by A1 and others when the complainant

demanded the promised interest and the principal amount

deposited, the same was refused by the accused persons who

had misutilised the funds received from the complainant and

others, for other personal gains of the accused.

4. The case of the prosecution in Crime No.

223/CR/Tvpm/08 can be summarised as follows:-

There are altogether nine accused persons in this case.

They are:-

                A1           Sabarinath

                A2           Bindu Mahesh

                A3           Rajan

                A4           Adhila Beevi

                A5           Vinodh

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009    -:4:-

                 A6          Beneef

                 A7          Chandrika

                 A8          Feni Felix and

                 A9          Bindu Suresh

  On 6-8-2008 the          accused persons in furtherance of the

criminal conspiracy hatched by them with a view to cheat the

investors and thereby make unlawful gains therefrom,

induced the de facto complainant Sajeevan to deposit Rs.

1,00,000/- in the concern by name Nest Investment Solutions

near the Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram and thereby

committed criminal breach of trust and cheating by not

paying the interest or the principal amounts as promised


5. I heard Adv. Sri. S. Rajeev, the learned counsel

appearing for the common petitioner and Sri. C.K. Suresh,

the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the common

petitioner made the following submissions before me in

support of his request for bail:-

The petitioner who is aged 20 years has an excellent

track record in his academic career. He is a good sportsman

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:5:-

and gifted with varied talents. He was working as an agent in

Met Life Insurance. Using his skill he decided to conduct a

financial firm and collected amounts from various

customers and invested a portion of the amounts in Met Life

Insurance, a portion in share business and a portion in real

estate. Until his arrest he was never involved in any other

crime nor was there any complaint from any of the

subscribers. Unfortunately, at a time when the petitioner was

away on a foreign trip, one Pramod siphoned off a sum of

rupees four crores from the establishment of the petitioner.

Since the said Pramod was a close confidant of the

petitioner, he was not in a position even to file a complaint

against the said Pramod for fear of damage to the reputation

of the establishments floated by him. The act of betrayal by

Pramod was committed at the instance of one Chandramathi

who had worked as an agent in the petitioner’s firm and who

had later started a rival business and informed the petitioner’s

subscribers that they would not get their money from the

petitioner. All on a sudden the customers of the petitioner

barged into his establishment demanding their money back.

Since no financial institution can withstand such a mass

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:6:-

claim, the petitioner had no other alternative except to court

arrest and face the consequences. The total liability of the

petitioner is only 9 crores and the petitioner has got assets of

more than 10 crores now under the custody of the Court

Receiver in a suit pending before the Sub Court,

Thiruvananthapuram. The recession which is a global

calamity is also a reason for the petitioner not being able to

meet the unexpected demand from his customers. The

petitioner is not going to flee from justice. His passport which

was seized by the Medical College Police is presently in the

custody of the Court of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Thiruvananthapuram. If the petitioner is released on bail, he

may be able to pay off his customers.

7. I am afraid that I cannot agree with the above

submissions made in support of the petitioner’s fervent

request for bail. There are about 29 cases in which the

petitioner is the common accused. Crime No.

231/CR/Tvpm/08 is the case re-registered by the Crime Branch

Police (CBCID). The said Case arose out of Crime No. 252/08

of Kadakkavoor Polcie Station. Likewise, CBCID Crime No.

223/CR./Tvpm/08 arises out of Crime No. 287/Kadakkavoor

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:7:-

Police Station. Almost all the cases registered against the

petitioner are at the instance of depositors who are alleged to

have been duped by the petitioner and his associates. It was

promising attractive returns that the petitioner and the other

co-accused mobilised deposits totalling to more than Rs. 10

crores from various depositors. They are believed to have

deceived more than 1200 depositors and after amassing the

ill-gotten wealth, they allegedly went underground closing the

establishments namely Nest Investment Solutions, I – Nest,

S.J.R. Group and Total 4 You etc. The petitioner was heading

all the fake institutions and he took an active part in inducing

the depositors to make huge deposits in the establishments

promising 30 to 50 percentage returns on their deposits. Bulk

of the depositors who had deposited their money in

Nationalised Banks for the purpose of the marriage of their

daughters and allied purposes had withdrawn those deposits

and deposited in the establishments of the petitioner

expecting the high interest offered. The prime confidants of

the petitioner namely, Chandramathi and Dr. Remani are still

absconding. The petitioner started the fake institutions only

one and a half years back. His father was a Class-IV employee

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:8:-

and his mother is a house wife in Neyyattinkara. His family

has only 10 cents of property in Neyyattinkara which is a

rural area. The initial version of the petitioner to the police

was that he had secured COT recognition by canvassing

policies worth Rs. 74 crores from the public. But on perusal

of the records of Met Life Insurance it was found out that

almost all the policy holders for whom the petitioner was the

sponsor are either co-accused or suspects or even the Ext-

staff of the petitioner and through them more than Rs.

1,15,36,296/- had already been remitted as premium

amount. The policy holders of the petitioner in Met Life

Insurance had told the police that they had furnished

application forms for obtaining the policies in Met Life

Insurance on the representation made to them by the

petitioner that their premium amounts had already been

remitted by the petitioner. The police are investigating into

the Benami nature of the policies. The investigation thus far

conducted by the Crime Branch Police has revealed that the

petitioner had purchased 19 luxury Cars with the money

fraudulently obtained from the general public. The following

are the details of the Cars purchased by the petitioner:-

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:9:-

1. A Maruthi Swift Car bearing Reg. No. KLO1 AK 35 from
one Latheef for Rs. 6,40,000/-.

2. A Honda CRV with Register No. KL 20 A 1919 was
purchased by the petitioner inhis name for Rs. 18,30,000/-
in which Rs. 10,00,000/- was hire purchase loan from
Kotak Mahindra Bank, Vellayambalam

3. A Skoda car bearing Reg. No. KL 20 A 11 was
purchased in his name for Rs. 21,00,000/-.

4. A Lancer Cedia car bearing Reg. No. Klo1 AS 8002 was
brought for another accused Lekshmi Mohan in her name
for Rs. 9,00,000/-

5. A Wolswagen Beetle car bearing Reg. No. MP45 C 382 was
brought from Ernakulam Vyttila fo Rs. 28,00,000/- ready

6. Another Honda Accord car bearing Reg. No. KL07 At 2 was
purchased for 8,25,000/-.

7. Another Maruthi Swift car bearing Reg. No. KL07 AT 2 was
purchased for Rs. 8,25,000/-

8. Another Lancer Cedia Car with Reg. No. KL 20 8400 was
purchased for Rs. 9,20,000/- and registered at
Neyyattinkara RTO.

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:10:-

9. A Nippon Toyotta Camry car with Reg. No. purchased in
the name of the father Rajan who is another accused for Rs.

10. Another old model car by name Vanguard car with Reg.
No. MDN 3567 was purchased from Salem for Rs.

11. A Tata Indica car bearing Reg. No. KL01 AP 6104 in the
name of the petitioner was purchased from a private
person for Rs. 2,80,000/-

12. A Honda Accorde with Reg. No. KL 39/Tem. New
Registration (Temporary) was purchased for 19,00,000/- in
the petitioner’s name.

13. A Lexes Car with Reg. No. OL6C 3500 was purchased from
one Raj Kumar for Rs. 11,00,000/-

14. A Mitzubishi Pajew car with Reg. No. KL 20 A 555 was
purchased by the petitioner in his name for Rs. 16,30,000/-
out of which s. 10,00,000/- is Hire purchase loan from

15. A Skoda Loura car with Reg. No. KLO1 AS 2002 was
purchased by the petitioner for Rs. 17,00,000/-.
Rs.11,00,000/- is hire purchase loan from ICICI Bank ,
Statue Branch.

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:11:-

16. The prestigious BMW car purchased in the name of the
petitioner for Rs. 38,00,000/-

17. A Civic Car with Reg. No. KLO 5X007 was purchased for
Rs. 9,30,000/- in the petitioner’s name.

18. Another Innova car with Reg. No. KL01 AT 171 was
purchased by the petitioner for Rs. 12,00,000/- and
registered in the name of another accused Hemalatha. The
car was in the possession of another prime accused Dr.

19. Another old model car by name Ford Anglier was
purchased for Rs. 70,000/- from Salem.

The investigation conducted by the Crime Branch Police has

revealed that the petitioner had entered into agreements for

purchase of landed properties paying huge amounts by way of

advance utilising the money which the unsuspecting public

had deposited with him after reposing implicit faith and

confidence in him. The following are the details of those


i) For taking over the company named Consumer Credit and

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:12:-

Hire purchase Limited the petitioner made an agreement with
one M.A. Mathi of Koyencherry for Rs. 39,00,000/- in which Rs.
20,00,000/- was deposited at Dhanalekshmi Bank,
Vazhuthacaud as fixed deposit and holded 91 % share of the
said company.

ii) The petitioner made agreement for the purchase of a 20
cent landed property at Kazhakuttam Attipra near the Highway
and paid an advance of Rs. 30 lakhs.

3. The petitioner made an agreement with one Asharaf for
purchasing 12 cents of landed property with a house for Rs. 1
crore 40 lakhs. Cheque amounting to Rs. 66 lakhs was paid.

4. The petitioner Sabarinath has given Rs. 85 lakhs as loan to
one Sreekantan who was the NRUI Manager of Vazhuthacaud
Dhanalekshmi Bank.

5. The petitioner Sabarinath has purchased another property
with a house at Thiruvananthapuram Kalladi paying Rs. 28

6. The petitioner Sabarinath has given Rs. 23 lakhs to one
Biju of Mavelikkara by closing an FD account in Vazhuthacaud
Dhanalekshmi Bank and by transferring the same to Federal
Bank and also gave to Biju gold worth Rs. 10 lakhs. The goild
was received back and gave to Shyam.

7. The petitioner ventured to real estate by deceiving and

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:13:-

using the money of the people who has deposited in his fake
financial institution. For one of the costly purchase of a landed
property of 4 = acres in the name of his binami one
Udayakumar. An agreement was made with the owner of the
said property one Rajkumar for Rs. 4 = crore and advance of
Rs. 63 lakhs was paid by the petitioner. The petitioner was
proposing to construct flats in that property and sell it.

8. For purchasing another costly property of 7 acres 84 cents
at Pidaram near Thirumala, an agreement was made for Rs. 3
crore 95 lakhs between the petitioner and the owner of the said
property one D.N. Nair. An advance of Rs. 1 crore 10 lakhs was
paid as advance by the petitioner. The construction works of
villas including a Tourism club and a car club was estimated at
Rs. 1 crore 13 lakhs. Investigation has revealed that
construction works were progressing before reporting of the

9. The petitioner made another agreement for the purchase
of a 9 cent land along with a house for Rs. 1 crore 40 lakhs in
Thiruvananthapuram Vattiyoorkavu junction and for the same
he paid Rs. 72 lakhs as advance.

10. Alleppey Kuttanadu was another destination where the
petitioner spend the money of them illegally and choose to
purcahse and take over a resort by name Senic Villa in a 1 acre
25 cent land from an NRI with regard to the purchase he made
an agreement for Rs. 1 crore 80 lakhs and paid an advance of
50 lakhs.

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:14:-

11. The petitioner Sabarinath has given Rs. 46 lakhs as loan
during February 2008 to one Shammer owner of Velocity
Travels at Sasthamangalam.

It is also revealed that the petitioner bought a flat for Rs. 30

crores in Thiruvananthapuram Kowdiar, Queens Way Point.

He had also taken another flat on rent from Marine Plaza

Abad Building at Marine Drive, Kochi paying an advance of

Rs. 1,20,000/-. The names and other particulars of the

innumerable depositors who have been duped are yet to be

collected by the investigating agency. Besides Met Life

Insurance, it is believed that there could be policy holders of

the petitioner in other institutions like Sharewealth and

Sharekhan. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not

complete with regard to many of the other crimes registered

against him. There is also a chance of the petitioner making

himself scarce if released on bail and thereby fleeing from

justice. He is a person who had undertaken foreign tours at

this young age of twenty years. The fact that his passport is

in the custody of the Court is no guarantee that he will not

go abroad. When the details of the assets which have been

B.A. Nos. 1029 AND 1031 OF 2009 -:15:-

committed to the custody of the Court Receiver by the Sub

Court, Thiruvananthapuram are not known, It may not be safe

to presume that all the ill-gotten assets of the petitioner are

custodia legis. Two of the female accused are still

absconding. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the

petitioner. These applications are, accordingly, dismissed.

Dated, this the 31st day of March, 2009.



/true copy/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information