BA Nos.1716/2021, 1838/2021 & 7402/2021 in Crime No.756/2018 (Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram)
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Justice Viju Abraham
- Judgment Date
- 2023-01-17
- Court Decision / Holding
- Anticipatory bail applications allowed. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on 20.01.2023 at 11:00 a.m., and shall subject themselves for interrogation on that day and on any other day/days as directed. If arrested, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court on the same day and released on bail, subject to: (i) bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties; (ii) appearance before the IO every Saturday at 11:00 a.m. until filing of final report; (iii) appearances as summoned; (iv) no contact with the victim/defacto complainant or interference with the investigation; (v) no involvement in other crimes while on bail. The Court notes the possibility of recoveries by police under the guidance of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663).
- Final Disposition
- The applications are allowed; anticipatory bail granted with specified conditions and surrender date fixed; limited custody for investigation; reference to Sushila Aggarwal for police powers while on bail.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Mani P (Accused No.3)
- Raja Mohan M (Accused No.4)
- Arul Kumar A (Accused Nos.5,6,7,9,10,11,12,13 &15)
- Babu G
- Balakrishnan Nair
- Lalu S
- Syamala P Mani
- Siju S
- Omana
- Daysi Kesavan
- Sundaran
Respondents
- State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
- Part-Time Administrator, Parassala Rural Co-operative Society No.1509 ( impleaded ), Parassala, Thiruvananthapuram
- Addl R2 Parassala Rural Co-operative Society No.1508 (impleaded as per order dated 19.3.2021)
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Adv M.R. Sasith (for Mani P)
- • Adv R.T. Pradeep (for Raja Mohan M)
- • Adv Govind R. S. Krishna Mohan Das A. (for other applicants)
Counsels for Respondents
- • Adv SMT Seetha S – Sr. P.P
- • Adv M.C. Ashi – P.P
Case Synopsis & Summary
These are anticipatory bail applications arising out of Crime No.756/2018 of Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, filed by accused numbers 3, 4, 5–15. The Kerala High Court, with Justice Viju Abraham presiding, considered the petitions on 17 January 2023 along with connected matters. The prosecution alleges misappropriation of bank funds and offences under IPC sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with 34. The court noted that the crime was registered in 2018 and there exists an earlier order prohibiting arrest, and that the petitioners have approached the court after a long interval. The Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The court observed that custodial interrogation may not be required at this stage given the lapse of time and the lack of arrest history since the prior order, and that only limited custody would be necessary for investigation. It referred to common orders in BA Nos.5265/2018 and 5369/2018 directing surrender for interrogation and stated that, in the event of arrest, the petitioners would be produced before the jurisdictional court and released on bail subject to conditions. The final decision grants anticipatory bail with specified conditions, including bond and sureties, regular appearances, reporting, no contact with victims, and no involvement in other crimes; surrender before the IO on 20.01.2023. The order cites the Supreme Court decision in Sushila Aggarwal to justify police power to recover if necessary, even during bail.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The applicants submit that since the crime occurred in 2018 and there was an earlier order not to arrest the petitioners, custodial interrogation is not essential at this stage; the investigation can proceed with limited custody and subject to conditions; the petitioners are ready to cooperate and surrender as directed. The delay in proceeding and absence of arrest history since the earlier order are cited as factors weighing in favor of bail.
Contentions of Respondents
The State contends that the offences are grave and the investigation is active; custodial interrogation may be necessary to advance the investigation, and bail should be granted only with robust conditions to prevent interference with witnesses and further crimes.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another | 2020 (1) KHC 663 | Positive | Cited to justify the police's power to investigate and effect recoveries and to contextualize bail-related police actions. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against BA Nos.1716/2021, 1838/2021 & 7402/2021 in Crime No.756/2018 (Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.