High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2024-01-24Bail granted

Faizal P.S. v. Sub Inspector of Police, Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram & State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:Bail Application No. 185 of 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C.S. Dias
Judgment Date: 2024-01-24
Court Decision / Holding: The bail application is allowed. The petitioner Faizal P.S. is ordered to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for equal amount, subject to conditions (appearance before the IO on Saturdays for two months or until final report, no inducement or tampering with witnesses, no commission of offences while on bail, surrender of passport if any, and compliance with any other bail conditions; violation may lead to cancellation; IO may continue to investigate and effect recoveries if necessary, as per law). The order references Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) to support permissible actions by the IO during bail.
Final Disposition: Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Faizal P.S

Respondents

Sub Inspector of Police, Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sayed Mansoor Bafakhy Thangal

Counsels for Respondents

• Smt. Neema T.V., Senior Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Kerala High Court bail application under Section 439 CrPC filed by Faizal P.S. in Crime No. 995/2022 of Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging offences under Sec. 420 read with Sec. 34 IPC. The prosecution contends that the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, lured the complainant into believing they could secure a loan of Rs. 7.5 crores; the complainant allegedly paid Rs. 7,50,000 to the second accused, who forwarded it to the first accused, which amounted to a fraudulent transaction. The petitioner argues innocence and false implication, claiming he merely provided bank details for payment and was not a beneficiary. He has been in judicial custody since 7.12.2023, and the investigation as it pertains to him is practically complete with no recovery to be effected against him. The State contends that the investigation is still ongoing and the other accused remain at large, so releasing him on bail could impede the investigation. The court, after considering these submissions, and noting the petitioner’s factual position, allowed the bail application, imposing standard bonds and conditions designed to ensure presence, non-interference, and potential surveillance. It also cited Sushila Aggarwal to justify police powers during bail where required.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends innocence and false implication. The delay between the alleged incident (June 2022) and the FIR (25 Oct 2022) and the arrest on 7 Dec 2023 suggests a weak case. He asserts he only gave his bank details to transfer funds and was not a beneficiary; there are no recoveries sought against him. He has remained in custody since 7 Dec 2023 and is willing to abide by any bail conditions. The investigation with respect to him is nearly complete, and his release would not impede ongoing inquiries.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor argues that the investigation is ongoing and accused 1 and 3–5 are at large; releasing the petitioner on bail would hamper the investigation. The seriousness of the offences under Sec. 420 r/w Sec. 34 IPC, the involvement of multiple accused, and the need to preserve the integrity of the investigation justify a cautious approach; hence bail should be refused or tightly conditioned.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	The court cites this Supreme Court decision to justify that an Investigating Officer may continue investigations and effect recoveries even while an accused is on bail, demonstrating law and procedure applied to ensure investigative completeness.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

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 Faizal P.S. v. Sub Inspector of Police, Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram & State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

1 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 4TH MAGHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 185 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.995/2022 OF Kallambalam Police Station, ``` ## **`Thiruvananthapuram`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` FAIZAL.P.S AGED 30 YEARS S/O.SYED, PULIKOOTIL HOUSE, PATTEPADAM, KONATHUKUNNU, THRICHUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680123 BY ADV SAYED MANSOOR BAFAKHY THANGAL ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KALLAMBALAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695605 2STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.NEEMA.T.V, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 ## **C.S.DIAS,J** **======================** **Bail Application No. 185 of 2024** **----------------------------------Dated this the 24[th] day of January, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the second accused in crime No.995/2022 of the Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered against the accused (five in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sec.420 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 7.12.2023. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: the accused in prosecution of their common intention made the defacto complainant believe that they could secure a loan for 3 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 Rs.7.5/- crores. Accordingly, as the defacto complainant did not have a property of his own, the first accused assured him to secure a property of a third person on condition that he pays an amount of Rs.7,50,000/-. On believing the words of the accused, the defacto complainant transferred an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- to the bank account of the second accused who in turn handed over the money to the first accused. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri.Sayed Mansoor Bafakhy Thangal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 4 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The very fact that the alleged incident occurred in June 2022, that the FIR was lodged only on 25.10.2022 and the petitioners were arrested on 7.12.2023 speaks about the falsity of the crime. At any rate, the petitioner had only allegedly given his bank details to transfer the money. The petitioner is not a beneficiary. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 7.12.2023. The investigation so far as it relates to the petitioner is practically complete. The petitioner is willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the investigation is still in progress. The accused 1 and 3 to 5 are still at large. If the petitioner is let off on bail, it would hamper with the investigation. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the specific allegation made against the petitioner that he only gave his bank account details to the defacto complainant to transfer the money, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 7.12.2023, the investigation so far as it relates to the petitioner is practically complete and no recovery is to be effected, I am of the view that notwithstanding the fact that the accused 1 and 3 to 5 have 6 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 not been arrested, the petitioner is to be released on bail. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; 7 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 (ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; (iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; (v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of 8 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. (vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila** **Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1)** **KHC 663].** sd/- sks/24.1.2024 **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** 9 Bail Application No. 185 of 2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 185/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1THE TRUE COPY OF FIR NO.995 OF 2022 OF KALLAMBALAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Annexure 2THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 22-12-2023 PASSED BY SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Annexure 3THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY DATED 06-01-2024 PASSED IN CRL.M.C NO.3414 OF 2023 BY SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ```