Rani Philip v. The State of Kerala

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 4877 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1123/2023 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER/S: ``` 1* **`RANI PHILIP, AGED 44 YEARS D/O PHILIP SOLAMON, DEVIKA BHAVANAM, EDAVATTAM, PERINAD, VELLIMON P.O., KOLLAM, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD., NALLILA BRANCH, KOLLAM, PIN – 691511`** ``` * CORRECTED AS RANI PHILIP, D/O PHILIP SOLAMON, PUNNAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, NALLILA P.O., KOLLAM - 691515, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANGER, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, NALLILA BRANCH, KOLLAM - AS PER ORDER DATED 3.7.2023 IN CRL.M.A NO.1/2023 IN BA. NO.4877/2023 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` THE STATE OF KERALA , THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM - 691501, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERANAKULAM ``` ``` SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEM T.V. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4886/2023, 6027/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 2 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 4886 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1120/2023 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` PRATHEEP S, AGED 50 YEARS S/O SREEDHARAN PILLAI K., DEVIKA BHAVANAM, EDAVATTOM, PERINAD, VELLIMON P.O., KOLLAM, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER EAST KALLADA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691511 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` THE STATE OF KERALA , THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM - 691501 REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERANAKULAM, PIN – 682031 ``` ## **`SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V`** ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4877/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 3 ``` # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 6027 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.623/2023 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION, ``` ## **`ALAPPUZHA`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` PUSHPAMMA JIMMI, AGED 62 YEARS D/O K.J. JOSEPH. KOILPARAMBIL, THIRUVAMBADY, ALAPPUZHA NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD., IRON BRIDGE BRANCH, KAICHOONDIMUKKU, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688006 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 ``` ``` SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4877/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 4 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 7316 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1897/2023 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER: ``` ``` SREEJITH, AGED 40 YEARS S/O P.S. MURALI, BRANCH MANAGER, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, PALATHUNKAL EBENEZER, ERAVIPEROOR P.O., KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD NELLIKUNNUM BRANCH, THOTTATHILL BUILDING, NELLIKKUNNUM P. .O, KOLLAM, KERALA, PIN - 689542 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS PAVAN ROSE JOHNSON ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 ``` ``` SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4877/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 5 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 7401 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1688/2023 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER: ``` ``` BINEETHA, AGED 42 YEARS D/O J C JOSE, BRANCH MANAGER, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, NANDANAM, SUDARIMUKKU, VENNALA HIGH SCHOOL RD, ARAKKAKADAVU, VENNALA, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, GROUND FLOOR, ALPHA PLAZA BUILDING, K.P VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, PIN - 682028 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS PAVAN ROSE JOHNSON ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 ``` ``` PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHYNIMOL V.O. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4877/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 6 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 8491 OF 2023 ``` ## **`CRIME NO.597/2023 OF YEROOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** ``` 1VIMAL VARKEY, AGED 49 YEARS S/O O.T.VARKEY, BRANCH MANAGER, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, S N SHOPPING COMPLEX ANCHAL, YEROOR, KERALA, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER KADAKKAL MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, CITY CENTER BUILDING, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM, PIN - 689695 ``` ``` 2BEENA PAPPACHAN, D/O PAPPACHAN, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, S N SHOPPING COMPLEX ANCHAL, YEROOR, KERALA, NOW WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER KILIMANOOR, MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD, ARJUN TOWERS, KILIMANOOR PUNCHAYATH BUS STAND, KILIMANOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 689695 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA S.RAJEEV SARITHA THOMAS PAVAN ROSE JOHNSON ALEN J. CHERUVIL SAHL ABDUL KADER ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHYNIMOL V.O. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2024, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4877/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 7 ``` ## **Dated this the 19[th] day of March, 2024 COMMON O R D E R** The applications are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(‘Code’, for short), for orders of pre-arrest bail. 2. B.A. No.4877/2023 is filed by the sole accused in Crime No.1123/2023 of the Kundara Police Station, Kollam, B.A. No.4886/2023 is filed by the sole accused in Crime No.1120/2023 of the Kundara Police Station, B.A. No.6027/2023 is filed by the second accused in Crime No.623/2023 of the Alappuzha South Police Station, B.A. No.7316/2023 is filed by the first accused in Crime No.1897/2023 of the Kottarakara Police Station, B.A.No.7401/2023, is filed by the first accused in Crime No.1688/2023 of the Palarivattom Police Station and B.A.No.8491/2023 is filed by the accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.597/2023 of the Yerror Police Station, Kollam, all **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 8 ``` registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. As the bail applications arise out of the similar transactions, they are consolidated and jointly heard, and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. The crux of the prosecution allegation in all the crimes is that; the accused had canvassed deposits for the companies named M/s SREI Equipment Finance Limted, and SREI Infrastructure Limited, which are the sister concerns of M/s Muthoot Finance Limited, by dishonestly representing to the de facto complainants/depositors that the companies would pay them reasonable interest and other benefits on maturity of the deposits. Consequently, believing the representation, the depositors had deposited substantial amounts in the above two companies. However, the accused failed to pay the promised interest or return the **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 9 ``` capital. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 4. Heard Sri. S.Rajeev, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the cases and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, Smt. Neema T.V and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Senior Public Prosecutors. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. In fact, the petitioners are only the employees of the M/s Muthoot Finance Ltd, which is not a sister concern of M/s SREI Equipment Finance Ltd or SREI Infrastructure Ltd as alleged by the prosecution. Even going by the prosecution case, the de facto complainants had directly invested their money in the above said two companies in non-convertible debentures. The two companies are Non-Banking Finance Companies functioning with the permission of the Reserve Bank of **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 10 ``` India. Any person can approach the two companies and purchase the debentures, which was a public issue. M/s Muthoot Securities Limited was one of the selling points. But, the petitioners have no role in the said company. They are only the paid employees of the Muthoot Finance Ltd. Therefore, they cannot be implicated as accused for any dishonest act done by the two Non-Banking Companies. Notwithstanding the above contentions, the petitioners were served with Section 41A notices of the Code and have subjected themselves to interrogation on several occasions. In a batch of eighteen cases, the accused similarly situated to the petitioners were granted orders of pre-arrest bail by this Court. The petitioners are entitled to parity. In the present crimes, the Investigating Officers have directed the petitioners to submit additional documents which are not in their possession. The petitioners were never in charge of the affairs, administration or management of M/s SREI **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 11 ``` Equipment Finance Ltd, SREI Infrastructure Ltd or M/s Muthoot Finance Limited. In any given case, the petitioners’ custodial interrogation is not necessary and no recovery is to be effected. The petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the applications may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutors seriously opposed the applications. The Investigating Officers have filed bail objection reports, inter-alia, stating that, if the petitioners are granted orders of pre-arrest bail, they may indulge in similar offences. It would also send a wrong message to the Society. The petitioners’ custodial interrogation is necessary. The petitioners may threaten the depositors, which will hinder the investigation. Nonetheless, it is conceded that similarly placed accused have been granted orders of pre-arrest bail in 18 connected matters, that the alleged **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 12 ``` transactions took place in 2018 and the crimes have been registered in 2023, that the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officers on multiple occasions and subject themselves to interrogation and it is only because the petitioners have failed to produce additional documents as sought by the Investigating Officer, their custodial interrogation is sought for. 7. The gravamen of the prosecution allegation in all the crimes is that, the petitioners had lured the de facto complainants to invest money in the non-convertible debentures of the two companies named M/s SREI Equipment Finance Ltd, and SREI Infrastructure Ltd. 8. The materials on record substantiate that the debentures were floated by the two companies as a public issue with the previous permission of the Reserve Bank of India. The petitioners are only the paid employees of M/s Muthoot Finance Ltd. There is no material on record to show that M/s. Muthoot Finance Ltd is the sister concern **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 13 ``` of the above two companies. Even assuming the company was a sister concern, there is nothing on record to establish that the petitioners are in charge and responsible for the administration and management of the affairs of M/s. Muthoot Finance Limited. Another glaring aspect to be noted is that, the alleged investment was made in the year 2018, but, the FIRs were registered only in the year 2023, that is after five years. 9. While dealing with a similar matter, the Honourable Supreme Court in **Ashok Kumar v. State of Union Territory, Chandigarh** [SLP (Crl.) No.9949/2023], after taking note of the fact that the crime was registered after six years from the alleged date of incident and the accused had joined the investigation, went on to observe that, even though custodial interrogation is one of the effective modes of investigation, it is equally true that just because custodial interrogation is not required that by itself may not be a ground to release an accused on **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 14 ``` anticipatory bail, if the offences are serious in nature. However, a mere assertion on the part of the State while opposing a plea for anticipatory bail that custodial interrogation is necessary would not be sufficient. The State has to show or indicate more than prima facie why custodial interrogation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation. 10. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, especially on comprehending the undisputed facts that the crimes are registered after five years after the date of the alleged first date of the transaction, the petitioners have joined and co-operated with the investigation by subjecting themselves to interrogation on multiple occasions, prima facie there is no material to establish that the petitioners were in charge and responsible for the administration and management of M/s. SREI Equipmnet Finance Ltd, SREI **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 15 ``` Infrastructure Ltd, or M/s. Muthoot Finance Ltd, and the accused similarly placed to the petitioners have been granted orders of pre-arrest bail in a bunch of eighteen cases, I am of the definite view that the petitioners’ custodial interrogation is not necessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail applications, but subject to the condition that the petitioners co-operate with the investigation. In the result, the applications are allowed subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioners are directed to surrender before the respective Investigating Officer within 10 days from today. ii) In the event of the petitioners’ arrest, the Investigating Officers shall produce them before the competent and concerned jurisdictional court on the date of surrender itself. iii) On such production, the concerned jurisdictional **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 16 ``` courts shall release the petitioners on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the said court; iv) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation as and when directed by the Investigating Officers; v). The petitioners shall not intimidate witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner; vi). The petitioners shall not get involved in any other offence while on bail. vii). In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional courts shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. viii). Applications for deletion/modification of the **B.A. Nos.** **`4877, 4886, 6027, 7316, 7401, and 8491 of 2023`** ``` 17 ``` bail conditions shall also be filed before the court below. (ix) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officers to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are 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** ``` rmm/19/3/2024 ```