SHAJI.T v STATE OF KERALA & Abu.K.K
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- C.S.Dias
- Judgment Date
- 2024-03-05
- Court Decision / Holding
- The application is allowed. The petitioner SHAJI.T is ordered to be released on bail on a bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties for Rs.50,000 each. Conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for one month or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier, and as required by the IO; (ii) not to induce, threaten, or tamper with witnesses or influence others; (iii) shall not commit any offense while on bail; (iv) surrender any passport before the court; (v) violation may lead to cancellation of bail; (vi) applications for modification of bail conditions may be moved; (vii) IO may continue to investigate and effect recoveries as necessary, in line with Sushila Aggarwal’s doctrine.”,
- Final Disposition
- Bail allowed
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- SHAJI.T
Respondents
- State of Kerala
- Abu.K.K.
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Vinod S. Pillai
- • Ahammad Sachin K.
- • Jerry Peter
Counsels for Respondents
- • Smt Neema T. V.
Case Synopsis & Summary
ShaJi.T, the third accused in Crime No.218/2022 of Nattukal Police Station, Palakkad, moved B.A. No.1477/2024 under Section 439 CrPC seeking bail. The offences alleged against him include sections 379, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120B, 408 and 201 read with 34 IPC; the first accused and second accused are the President and Secretary of Urban Credit Society. It is alleged that, during 2005-2021, they fabricated a seal of a retired assistant engineer and used it on bills to misappropriate Rs.83,00,000 from the society, and stole Rs.7,00,000 worth of society articles. The petitioner contends innocence, claims false implication, and notes prior pre-arrest bail granted to co-accused; Annexures show the Court's order canceling an earlier pre-arrest bail and a 41A notice issued by IO; the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 07.02.2024. While the investigation is nearly complete and recoveries have been effected, the Public Prosecutor opposed bail, arguing ongoing investigation and need to secure further recoveries. The Sessions Court had earlier granted pre-arrest bail to co-accused, and the petitioner was treated comparatively. After careful consideration, the Judge found that further detention was unnecessary and allowed bail with conditions, including a bond of Rs.50,000, two sureties, periodic appearances, no tampering, surrender of passport, and reserved power to cancel bail, following the Supreme Court’s guidance in Sushila Aggarwal.
Provisions of Law Cited
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. doctrine: Investigating Officer may continue investigation and effect recoveries even while the accused is on bail; bail conditions may be used to safeguard the investigation.
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioner asserts total innocence and false implication. The offences charged are not attracted; the investigation is nearly complete with recoveries effected; the petitioner had previously obtained pre-arrest bail in a related matter; co-accused Nos.1 & 2 have been granted bail; since the petitioner has remained in custody since 07.02.2024, and investigation is largely complete, bail should be granted under Section 439 CrPC with conditions to ensure presence and prevent tampering; the Supreme Court guidance in Sushila Aggarwal is applicable.
Contentions of Respondents
The State contends that the investigation is ongoing and further recoveries are to be made; releasing the petitioner on bail could hamper the investigation; hence the bail application should be dismissed.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. | 2020 (1) KHC 663 | Positive | Court relies on the Supreme Court precedent that investigation can continue and recoveries may be effected during bail, guiding the imposition of bail conditions. |
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 SHAJI.T v STATE OF KERALA & Abu.K.K and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.