Muhammed Sojin Kappungal @ Kunjippu v. State of Kerala

``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 9535 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.15/2022 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL, Ernakulam ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMC 822/2023 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM ``` ## `PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3:` ``` MUHAMMED SOJIN KAPPUNGAL @ KUNJIPPU AGED 35 YEARS S/O. LATE MOHAMMED BAPPU HAJI, KAPPUNGAL VEETIL, THELAKKADU KAPPU DESOM, VETTATHUR VILLAGE, VETTATHUR PANCHAYAT, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 679325 BY ADVS. BALAMURALI K.P. HARIPRIYA.M MANU TOM SHAJI T.M. RENIL IQUBAL K. K.R.JITHIN AMAL C. PETER ``` ## `RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:` ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` SRI G. SUDHEER (PP) ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 2 ## **ORDER** Petitioner is stated to be the 3[rd] accused in Crime No.15 of 2022 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam Rural, alleging commission of offences under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 66 D of the Information Technology Act. [The learned Public Prosecutor submits that as per the report received by him, the petitioner is arrayed as the 4[th] accused.] The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the other accused persons had duped the defacto complainant of an amount of Rs.19,17,874.25/- by giving her a false promise that the money would be invested in a business opportunity and substantial returns would be obtained by the defacto complainant. It is alleged that after collecting the aforesaid money from the defacto complainant, the accused persons failed to return the money/the promised returns and thereby they ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 3 committed the offences alleged against them. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the petitioner was working abroad for some time and had thereafter returned to Kerala, on account of the fact that he had lost his job abroad. It is submitted that the petitioner had maintained an account with the ICICI Bank, Perinthalmanna. It is submitted that on account of the petitioner losing his job the said account was inactive and the petitioner was not operating the account. It is submitted that a friend of the petitioner had requested him to permit the use of that account for the purpose of trading activities and the said account was being operated by the said friend of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused on account of the fact that a sum of Rupees 1.5 lakhs out of the total sum paid by the defacto complainant to the accused had been paid ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 4 through the account of the petitioner maintained at the ICICI Bank, Perinthalmanna. It is submitted that the petitioner had obtained a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from his friend as a reward for permitting the usage of the account of the petitioner and the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with the defacto complainant. It is submitted that in such circumstances, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and the matter is being investigated. It is submitted that other cases are also registered where other persons have also been duped of the amounts using the same Modus Operandi. It is submitted that some part of the amount given by the defacto complainant was routed through the account of the petitioner and the petitioner cannot, therefore, feign ignorance of the transactions through ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 5 his account. It is submitted that the money was routed to the account of the petitioner with the full knowledge of the petitioner. The learned Public prosecutor also submits that the mobile number linked to the account in question was the mobile number used by the petitioner and therefore, he cannot state that he had no knowledge of the transactions through his account. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. The allegations against the petitioner are as noticed above. At this point of time, the contention of the petitioner, that his account was misused by one of his friends, to collect money from the defacto complainant cannot be considered or accepted. The truth of the matter can be revealed only after a thorough investigation. If the co-operation of the petitioner can be ensured with the investigation, ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 6 there is no reason to deny anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Therefore, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.15 of 2022 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam Rural subject to the following conditions: (i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer; (ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.15 of 2022 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam Rural on 05.12.2023 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so; (iii) Petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.15 of 2022 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam Rural. ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 7 (iv) Petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days of release on bail. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be in deemed custody while on bail as held in **Sushila Aggarwal & Others v. State (NCT Of Delhi) and Another** [2020 (5) SCC 1]. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, it is open to the Investigating officer in Crime No.15 of 2022 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Ernakulam Rural or the defacto complainant to approach this Court for cancellation of bail. **Sd/GOPINATH P. JUDGE** SSK/28/11 ``` B.A.No.9535 of 2023 ``` 8 ## `APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9535/2023` ## `PETITIONER ANNEXURES` - `Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.15/2022 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL.` - `Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED 31/10/2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN CRL.M.P. NO.1923/2022.` - `Annexure 3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED 30/03/2023 IN CRL.M.C. NO.822/2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM.`