High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted; case disposed of, with the petiti...

Rahees Khan v. State of Kerala & Others

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 203 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C.S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-01-23
Court Decision / Holding
The application in B.A. No. 203/2024 is allowed. The petitioner Rahees Khan is directed to be released on bail on a bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for the same amount, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before the Investigating Officer every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for two months or until the final report is filed; (ii) no inducement or tampering with witnesses; (iii) no offence while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport (or an affidavit in lieu, if none); (v) bail cancellation if conditions are violated; (vi) petitions for modification of conditions to be entertained; and (vii) IO may investigate and effect recoveries even while on bail, as laid down in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. The order also cites Annexures and confirms the completion of investigation. Sd/ C.S. Dias, J.
Final Disposition
Bail granted; case disposed of, with the petition allowed and bail ordered under specific conditions.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Rahees Khan

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
  • Station House Officer, Alappuzha North Police Station, Alappuzha
  • Thahir Aboobacker (Impleaded as Addl R3)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • D. Feroze
  • • T. S. Krishnendu
  • • Janet Varghese
  • • Adarsh A.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt. Seetha S.
  • • Smt. Vidya G Nair

Case Synopsis & Summary

Rahees Khan, the petitioner in Bail Application No. 203 of 2024, approached the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam seeking bail in Crime No. 1630/2023 of Alappuzha North Police Station, registered for offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. He was arrested on 19.12.2023. The prosecution’s concise case alleges that the petitioner collected Rs. 2,49,000 from the de facto complainant with a promise to secure admission for the complainant’s daughter in an institution, but failed to return the money or secure admission. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserting false implication, and asserted that the dispute had been settled with the third respondent. An affidavit by the third respondent stated no objection to the petitioner’s release on bail. The Public Prosecutor corroborated the settlement’s genuineness, noting the repayment arrangement within two months after release, and the third respondent supported these submissions. The Court found the investigation to be complete and that the petitioner had already remained in judicial custody since 19.12.2023; further detention was deemed unnecessary. After evaluating the materials, the Court granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of equal amount, quarterly/weekly appearances before the Investigating Officer for two months, prohibitions on inducement or tampering with witnesses, non-commission of any offence while on bail, surrender of any passport, and contingencies for cancellation or modification of conditions. The order cites Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. to justify the IO’s power to investigate and recover even during bail. The judge, C.S. Dias, allowed the application. Sd/ (C.S. Dias, J.).

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860Section 156(3) CrPC

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contended that he is innocent of the charges and has been falsely implicated. A settlement has been arrived at with the third respondent, who has filed an affidavit indicating no objection to the petitioner’s release on bail. The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the investigation and adhere to stringent conditions that the Court may impose.

Contentions of Respondents

The settlement between the petitioner and the third respondent is genuine and bona fide. It is agreed that the petitioner will repay the amount within two months of release. The affidavit of the third respondent is genuine. The Public Prosecutor supported the settlement, and the third respondent’s counsel endorsed it.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State(NCT of Delhi) and Anr.2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveUsed as authority for allowing continued investigation and recoveries by the Investigating Officer even when the accused is on bail.

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 Rahees Khan v. State of Kerala & Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ## `THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS` ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 ``` ## `BAIL APPL. NO. 203 OF 2024` ``` CRIME NO.1630/2023 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ``` ## `PETITIONER` ``` RAHEES KHAN, AGED 33 YEARS S/O RASHEED , PUTHUVAL HOUSE, VANDANAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688008 ``` ``` BY ADVS.D.FEROZE T.S.KRISHNENDU JANET VARGHESE ADARSH A. ``` ## `RESPONDENTS:` ``` 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 2STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688008 3THAHIR ABOOBACKER (IMPLEADED AS ADDL R3) S/O ABOOBACKER,PUTHENVEDU, THATHAMALLY P.O, AVALOOKUNNU WARD, ALAPPUZHA (IMPLEADED AS ADDL R3 AS PER ORDER DTD 19/1/24 IN CRL MA 1/24) BY ADV. VIDYA G NAIR ``` ## `OTHER PRESENT:` ``` SR PP SMT SEETHA S , ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.No.203/2024 -:2:- Dated this the 23[rd] 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 accused in Crime No.1630/2023 of Alappuzha North Police Station, registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner was arrested on 19.12.2023. 2. The concise case of the prosecution, is that: the accused had collected Rs.2,49,000/- from the de-facto complainant, promising that he would secure an admission for his daughter in an institution. However, he failed to secure the admission or return the amount received. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri. D.Feroze, the learned counsel B.A.No.203/2024 -:3:- appearing for the petitioner; Smt. Seetha S., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and Smt.Vidya G Nair, the learned counsel appearing for the additional third respondent/ de-facto complainant/ intervenor. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. Notwithstanding the above crime, the petitioner has settled the dispute with the third respondent. The parties have entered into a compromise and the third respondent has filed an affidavit before this Court stating that he has no objection in the petitioner being released on bail. The petitioner is willing to co-operate with the investigation and abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed. B.A.No.203/2024 -:4:- 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, ascertained and submitted that the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and the third respondent is genuine and bona-fide. It is agreed between the parties that the petitioner would return the amount received from the third respondent within a period of two months after his release from custody. It is also submitted that the affidavit filed by the third respondent is executed by the third respondent. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent also endorsed the above submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor . 7. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of Annexure-R3(A) affidavit filed by the third respondent, that the investigation in the case is complete, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 19.12.2023 and his further detention is B.A.No.203/2024 -:5:- unnecessary, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, subject to stringent conditions. 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 Officer on - Investigating every Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; - (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 B.A.No.203/2024 -:6:- 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 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 B.A.No.203/2024 -:7:- 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 Anr.** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. Sd/- ## **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** DST/23.01.24 //True copy// P.A. To Judge B.A.No.203/2024 -:8:- ## `APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 203/2024` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO: 1630 OF 2023 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ``` ``` ANNEXURE 2A TRUE COPY OF THE CMP NO 6758/2023 FILED BEFORE THE JFCM IX UNDER SECTION 156(3) CRPC ANNEXURE 3A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO 2945/2023 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION ANNEXURE 4A TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED 26.12.2023 IN CRLMC 3680/2023 ANNEXURE 5CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.1.2024 IN CRL.M.P NO 6381/2023 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R3(A)AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.3 ```