High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail applications allowed; Jose Thomas released...
Jose Thomas v. State of Kerala
Case / Petition Number:BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- C.S. Dias
- Judgment Date
- 2024-03-27
- Court Decision / Holding
- The applications are allowed. The petitioner Jose Thomas is to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for the like sum in each case, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before the Investigating Officer on Tuesdays and Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. until final report; (ii) no inducement or intimidation of witnesses; (iii) no commission of any offence while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport; (v) not leaving the jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Thrissur without permission; (vi) court may cancel bail on violation; (vii) applications for deletion/modification of bail conditions to be entertained by the court below; (viii) IO may continue investigation and take recoveries as permitted by Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another. The matter is decided by a Single Judge (C.S. Dias, J.).
- Final Disposition
- Bail applications allowed; Jose Thomas released on bail with conditions as set out in the order; five consolidated BA Nos. disposed of by one common order.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Jose Thomas
Respondents
- State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor
- Gilbert LourduraJ James
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Abraham Mathan
- • P. P. Harris
Counsels for Respondents
- • Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth
- • Jayaram S.
- • Dhanya Sunny
- • Ann Milka George
Case Synopsis & Summary
These bail applications arise from five separate FIRs (Crimes Nos. 162/2023, 195/2023, 196/2023, 205/2023 and 206/2023) registered at Town East Police Station, Thrissur, all involving a common alleged conspiracy to cheat a partner of Primaro Global Fincorp, Coimbatore. The petitioner, Jose Thomas, and several others are accused of dishonestly inducing the complainant to part with substantial sums (ranging from about Rs. 1.0 to 2.2 crore in each case) under the pretense of profits from business ventures including films, forex, exports, and real estate, but profits were not paid and capital was not returned. The five petitions, filed under Section 439 CrPC, are consolidated as the petitioner was the same in all, with arrests on 11–14 February 2024 and custody extended to around 45 days. The prosecution contends grave economic offences and the petitioner’s potential to interfere with investigations if released on bail. The defense argues innocence, false implication, and civil nature of the dispute, with investigation now practically complete and recoveries made. The court cites legal principles from Sanjay Chandra, Dataram Singh, and Raneef regarding bail and life/return rights, and ultimately allows bail with stringent conditions, balancing presumption of innocence with the public interest and investigation integrity.
Provisions of Law Cited
Section 439 of CrPC, 1973Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B r/w 34 IPC
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Presumption of innocence until proven guilty
- Bail is the rule and detention in jail is the exception
- Undertrial detention infringing Article 21 is a concern when trials are delayed
- Judicial discretion in granting bail must be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner
- Investigating authorities can continue investigation and take recoveries even while a person is on bail (as supported by Sushila Aggarwal v. State)
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations, and that the civil dispute is being treated as criminal by misapplication of the law. The petitioner contends that earlier bail applications were dismissed primarily on the ground of custodial interrogation being necessary; he has been in judicial custody for around 45 days, and by now the investigation is practically complete with recoveries effected. The defense urges that there is no direct evidence of flight risk or tampering, and that the scale of loss does not by itself establish a non-bailable offence. Relying on the presumption of innocence, the defense argues that continuing detention is unwarranted; the guidelines from Sanjay Chandra, Dataram Singh, and Raneef support release on bail with appropriate conditions to ensure cooperation with authorities and to prevent tampering. The petition seeks enlargement on bail consistent with the ends of justice while ensuring that the accused complies with conditions and does not obstruct the investigation.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents, led by the Public Prosecutor, contend that the investigation in the five connected crimes is ongoing and grainy. They emphasize the magnitude of the alleged economic offence, the accused’s ability to influence witnesses, and the risk of tampering with the investigation if released on bail. The authorities argue that the accused are part of a conspiracy to cheat a business partner of substantial sums, with multiple cases and complex financial transactions, necessitating custodial focus to protect evidence and maintain the integrity of ongoing investigations. They also highlight that the accused have substantial resources and political or social influence that could enable interference with witnesses or the investigation, thus warranting continued custody and a careful examination of bail terms. They urge adherence to strict conditions and continued supervision to safeguard the investigation’s progress and the complainant’s interests.
Cited Precedents (4)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sanjay Chandra v. CBI | 2012 1 SCC 40 | Positive | Cited to emphasize presumption of innocence and the principle that bail is the rule and detention is the exception. |
| Dataram Singh v. State of U.P | (2018) 3 SCC 22 | Positive | Cited to underscore that grant of bail is the rule and detention is an exception, with discretion exercised judiciously. |
| State of Kerala v. Raneef | (2011) 1 SCC 784 | Positive | Cited for the principle that indefinite detention of undertrials infringes Article 21 rights and bail is important to prevent such infringement. |
| Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another | 2020 (1) KHC 663 | Positive | Cited to permit continuing investigation and recoveries against a bail subject. |
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 Jose Thomas v. 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.
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**1**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS**
**WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946**
**BAIL APPL. NO. 2231 OF 2024**
**CRIME NO.162/2023 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.1448 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:**
**JOSE THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS S/O THOMAS, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, FLAT NO.1, 29/401/1, DAMODAR APARTMENT, KUNNATH LANE, NEAR THIRUVAMBADY TEMPLE, MOONUKUTTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN – 680001.**
**BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN P.P.HARRIS**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
**1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 GILBERT LOURDURAJ JAMES, S/O JAMES LOURDRAJ, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,, PIN - 641005 BY ADVS. ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH JAYARAMAN S.(K/1244/2019) DHANYA SUNNY(K/239/2024) ANN MILKA GEORGE(K/1014/2024)**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SHYNIMOL V.O.**
## **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**
**27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**2**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS**
**WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946**
**BAIL APPL. NO. 2233 OF 2024**
**CRIME NO.196/2023 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.1442 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:**
**JOSE THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS S/O THOMAS, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, FLAT NO.1, 29/401/1, DAMODAR APARTMENT, KUNNATH LANE, NEAR THIRUVAMBADY TEMPLE, MOONUKUTTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 680001**
**BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN P.P.HARRIS**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
- **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031**
- **2 GILBERT LOURDURAJ JAMES, S/O JAMES LOURDRAJ, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,, PIN - 641005**
**BY ADVS.**
**ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH JAYARAMAN S.(K/1244/2019) DHANYA SUNNY(K/239/2024) ANN MILKA GEORGE(K/1014/2024)**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEETHA S.**
**THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**
**27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**3**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS**
**WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946**
**BAIL APPL. NO. 2234 OF 2024**
**CRIME NO.195/2023 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.1335 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:**
**JOSE THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS S/O THOMAS, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, FLAT NO.1, 29/401/1, DAMODAR APARTMENT, KUNNATH LANE, NEAR THIRUVAMBADY TEMPLE, MOONUKUTTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 680001**
**BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN P.P.HARRIS**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
- **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031**
- **2 GILBERT LOURDURAJ JAMES, S/O JAMES LOURDRAJ, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,, PIN - 641005**
**BY ADVS. ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH JAYARAMAN S.(K/1244/2019) DHANYA SUNNY(K/239/2024) ANN MILKA GEORGE(K/1014/2024)**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEETHA S.**
**THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**
**27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**4**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS**
**WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946**
**BAIL APPL. NO. 2235 OF 2024**
**CRIME NO.205/2023 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.1443 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:**
**JOSE THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS S/O THOMAS, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, FLAT NO.1, 29/401/1, DAMODAR APARTMENT, KUNNATH LANE, NEAR THIRUVAMBADY TEMPLE, MOONUKUTTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 680001**
**BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN P.P.HARRIS**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
- **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031**
- **2 GILBERT LOURDURAJ JAMES, S/O JAMES LOURDRAJ, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,, PIN - 641005**
**BY ADVS.**
**ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH JAYARAMAN S.(K/1244/2019) DHANYA SUNNY(K/239/2024) ANN MILKA GEORGE(K/1014/2024)**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.NEEMA T.V.**
**THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**
**27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**5**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS**
**WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946**
**BAIL APPL. NO. 2236 OF 2024**
**CRIME NO.206/2023 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.1445 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:**
**JOSE THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS S/O THOMAS, VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE, FLAT NO.1, 29/401/1, DAMODAR APARTMENT, KUNNATH LANE, NEAR THIRUVAMBADY TEMPLE, MOONUKUTTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 680001**
**BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN P.P.HARRIS**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
- **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031**
- **2 GILBERT LOURDURAJ JAMES, S/O JAMES LOURDRAJ, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,, PIN - 641005**
**BY ADVS.**
**ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH JAYARAMAN S.(K/1244/2019) DHANYA SUNNY(K/239/2024) ANN MILKA GEORGE(K/1014/2024)**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.NEEMA T.V.**
**THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**
**27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**6**
## **C.S. DIAS, J**
**================================== BA No.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024 ================================== Dated this the 27[th] day of March, 2024**
## **O R D E R**
These are the second applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the very same accused in different crime numbers of the Town East Police Station, Thrissur to enlarge him on bail.
2. In B.A.2231/2024, the petitioner is the 3[rd] accused in Crime No.162 of 2023, in B.A.No.2233/2024, the petitioner is the 4[th] accused in Crime No.196/2023, in B.A. No.2234/2024, the petitioner is the 4[th] accused in Crime No.195/2023, in B.A.No.2235/2024, the petitioner is the 2[nd] accused in Crime No.205/2023 and in B.A.No.2236/2024 the petitioner is the 4[th] accused in Crime No.206/2023 all of the Town East Police station,
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**7**
Thrissur. The petitioner was arrested on 11.02.2024 in Crime No.195/2023 and arrest was formally recorded in the other four cases on 14.02.2024. Since the petitioner is the same in all the five
bail applications, the applications were consolidated, jointly heard and are being disposed of by this common order.
3. The common case of the prosecution in the above five crimes is that: the accused 1 to 4, after hatching a conspiracy, and in furtherance of their common intention to cheat the first informant, partner of Primaro Global Fincorp, Coimbatore, dishonestly induced him to pay Rs.1,21,25,000/- in crime No.162/203, Rs.2,00,00,000/- in Crime No.195/2023, Rs.1,00,00,000/- in Crime No.196/2023, Rs.1,94,00,000/- in Crime No.205/2023 & Rs.2,22,00,000/- in Crime No.206/2023 assuring him profits from various business ventures, including the distribution rights in films, forex investments, export business, real estate business etc. Despite receipt of the above amounts, the accused failed to pay any profit or return the capital. Thus, the
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**8**
accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120-B r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Heard Sri. Abraham Mathan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in all the cases, Smt.Neema T.V. and Smt.Seetha S., Shinymol V.O. the learned Public Prosecutors and Smt. Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth, the learned counsel appearing for the defector-complainant/2[nd] respondent.
5. 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 above crimes. A reading of the FIRs would reveal that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. The petitioner's earlier applications were dismissed by Annexure A12 common order principally on finding that the petitioner's custodial interrogation is necessary and the investigation was at a preliminary stage. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 45 days. The investigation in the
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**9**
cases is complete and recoveries have been effected. Therefore, the petitioner's further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. They contended that the investigation is in progress. They also stated that the petitioner has committed a grave economic offence. If the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to interfere with the investigation. Hence the application may be dismissed.
7. The learned Counsel for the defacto complainant also opposed the application. She submitted that going by the magnitude of the crime, the petitioner may not be released on bail at this stage. There are materials to show the involvement of the petitioner in all the crimes. The petitioner is an influential person and is likely to sabotage the investigation. Hence, the application may be dismissed.
8. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused hatched a conspiracy and received
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**10**
Rs.8.62 Crores from defacto complaint assuring profits in various business ventures. However the petitioner failed to pay any profit or return any capital to the defacto complainant.
9. Indisputably, this is the second application filed by the petitioner to enlarge him on bail. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 11.02.2024, which is 45 days. The investigation is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Hence, the application may be allowed.
10. In _**Sanjay Chandra v. CBI**_ , [2012 1 SCC 40], the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence until a person is found guilty. Any imprisonment prior to conviction is to be considered as punitive and it would be improper on the part of the Court to refuse bail solely on the ground of former conduct.
11. In **Dataram Singh v. State of U.P** ., [(2018) 3 SCC 22] the Honourable Supreme Court observed that grant of bail is a
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**11**
rule and putting a person in jail is an exception. Even though the grant of bail is entirely the discretion of the court, it has to be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case and the discretion has to be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner.
12. In _**State of Kerala v. Raneef**_ , [(2011) 1 SCC 784], the Honourable Supreme Court has declared that undertrial prisoners detained in jail for indefinite periods, without any sufficient reason or due to the delay in concluding the trial, will tantamount to infringement of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
13. After anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, especially on considering the facts that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 11.2.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and that the recovery has been effected, I am of the firm view that the petitioner’s further
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**12**
detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail applications, but subject to stringent conditions.
In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum in each of the cases , 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 Tuesday and Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m till the final report is filed. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed;
- (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
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**13**
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) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial of the jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Thrissur without the previous permission of the jurisdictional Court.
- (vi) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**14**
(vii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.
(viii) 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/-
**C.S. DIAS, JUDGE**
S.M.K.
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**15**
## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2231/2024**
## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
|**Annexure**|**-1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 162 OF**|
|---|---|---|
|||**2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,**|
|||**THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 18.01.2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-2**|**TRUE COPY OF W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023 DATED 27.**|
|||**01.2023 FILED BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-5**|**THE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22.12.2023**|
|||**IN B.A.NO. 5659 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-6**|**THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN**|
|||**B.A.NO. 463 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2024 IN**|
|||**CRL.M.P.NO. 1786 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-8**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**|
|||**07.03.2024 IN B.A.NO. 1448 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-9**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.10.2022**|
|||**WITH GRM NO. KL019164443202223M OF SRO**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-10**|**TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022**|
|**Annexure**|**-11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 242 OF 2022**|
|||**FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM**|
|**Annexure**|**12**|**ORDER DATED 07-03-2024 IN BAIL APPL.1448/2024**|
|||**ON HIGH COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-A13**|**TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY**|
|||**DR.D.GEORGE, CONSULTANT PHYSICIAN OF ST.**|
|||**JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL, KOTHAMANGALAM DATED**|
|||**20.03.2024**|
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**16**
## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2233/2024**
## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
|**Annexure**|**-1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 196 OF**|
|---|---|---|
|||**2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-2**|**TRUE COPY OF W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023 DATED 27.**|
|||**01.2023 FILED BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-5**|**THE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22.12.2023**|
|||**IN B.A.NO. 5651 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-6**|**THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN**|
|||**B.A.NO. 470 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2024 IN**|
|||**CRL.M.P.NO. 1787 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-8**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**|
|||**07.03.2024 IN B.A.NO. 1442 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-9**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.10.2022**|
|||**WITH GRM NO. KL019164443202223M OF SRO**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-10**|**TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022**|
|**Annexure**|**-11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 242 OF 2022**|
|||**FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM,**|
|**Annexure**|**12**|**ORDER DATED 07-03-2024 IN BAIL APPL.1442/2024**|
|||**ON HIGH COURT**|
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**17**
## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2234/2024**
## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
|**Annexure**|**-1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 195 OF**|
|---|---|---|
|||**2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,**|
|||**THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 20.01.2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-2**|**TRUE COPY OF W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023 DATED 27.**|
|||**01.2023 FILED BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-5**|**THE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22.12.2023**|
|||**IN B.A.NO. 5668 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-6**|**THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN**|
|||**B.A.NO. 466 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.02.2024 IN**|
|||**CRL.M.P.NO. 1789 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-8**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**|
|||**07.03.2024 IN B.A.NO. 1335 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-9**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.10.2022**|
|||**WITH GRM NO. KL019164443202223M OF SRO**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-10**|**TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022**|
|**Annexure**|**-11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 242 OF 2022**|
|||**FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM**|
|**Annexure**|**12**|**ORDER DATED 07-03-2024 IN BAIL APPL.1335/2024**|
|||**ON HIGH COURT**|
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**18**
## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2235/2024**
## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
|**Annexure**|**-1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 205 OF**|
|---|---|---|
|||**2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,**|
|||**THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 21.01.2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-2**|**TRUE COPY OF W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023 DATED 27.**|
|||**01.2023 FILED BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-5**|**THE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22.12.2023**|
|||**IN B.A.NO. 5646 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-6**|**THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN**|
|||**B.A.NO. 473 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2024 IN**|
|||**CRL.M.P.NO. 1785 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-8**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**|
|||**07.03.2024 IN B.A.NO. 1443 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-9**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.10.2022**|
|||**WITH GRM NO. KL019164443202223M OF SRO**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-10**|**TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022**|
|**Annexure**|**-11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 242 OF 2022**|
|||**FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM,**|
|**Annexure**|**12**|**ORDER DATED 07-03-2024 IN BAIL APPL.1443/2024**|
|||**ON HIGH COURT**|
**BA Nos.2231, 2233, 2234, 2235 & 2236 of 2024**
**19**
## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2236/2024**
## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
|**Annexure**|**-1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 206 OF**|
|---|---|---|
|||**2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION,**|
|||**THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 21.01.2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-2**|**TRUE COPY OF W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023 DATED 27.**|
|||**01.2023 FILED BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT**|
|**Annexure**|**-3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 IN**|
|||**W.P(CRL). 85 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-5**|**THE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22.12.2023**|
|||**IN B.A.NO. 5656 OF 2023**|
|**Annexure**|**-6**|**THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN**|
|||**B.A.NO. 475 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2024 IN**|
|||**CRL.M.P.NO. 1788 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-8**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED**|
|||**07.03.2024 IN B.A.NO. 1445 OF 2024**|
|**Annexure**|**-9**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.10.2022**|
|||**WITH GRM NO. KL019164443202223M OF SRO**|
|||**THRISSUR**|
|**Annexure**|**-10**|**TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022**|
|**Annexure**|**-11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 242 OF 2022**|
|||**FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM**|
|**Annexure**|**12**|**ORDER DATED 07-03-2024 IN BAIL APPL.1445/2024**|
|||**ON HIGH COURT**|