BY AD vs K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV.: SRI. NOUSHAD K.A SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4113/2025, 4123/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4113 OF 2025 CRIME NO.223/2025 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.592 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4: 1 2 3 4 R.J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683515 R.J JOSEPH AGED 57 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683515 JOHNSON R.J AGED 55 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683515 JOBY R J AGED 50 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 4 RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. C.S HRITHWICK, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4123 OF 2025 CRIME NO.203/2025 OF Munambom Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.595 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER : ( S )/ACCUSED R.J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. C.S HRITHWICK, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4124 OF 2025 CRIME NO.204/2025 OF Munambom Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.594 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER : ( S )/ACCUSED R J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. G.SUDHEER, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 7 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J –--------------------------------------------------------------- B.A. Nos.4118, 4113, 4124 and 4123 of 2025 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of April, 2025 O R D E R These Bail Applications are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. These bail applications are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these bail applications by a common order.

2. The petitioners are accused in Crime Nos.224/2025 & 223/2025 of Ernakulam Central Police Station and Crime Nos.204/2025 & 203/2025 of Munambam Police Station, Ernakulam. The above cases are registered inter alia under Sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC and also under Section 21 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short ‘BUDS Act’). BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 8

3. The prosecution case in brief is that the accused herein are the Managing Partners and Directors of Athira Gold and Silk, High Court Junction. It is alleged that the accused induced the defacto complainants in these cases to invest money in their business. The accused assured the defacto complainants that the invested amount would yield profits. Relying on the assurance of the accused persons, the defacto complainants in these cases deposited huge amount. But, the accused failed to return either the promised profit or the invested amount.

4. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and also the counsel appearing for the defacto complainant in BA No.4118/2025.

5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were arrested in crime No.222/2025 of Ernakulam Central Police Station. The police filed a remand report, in which two of these cases were mentioned. But, the arrest was not recorded in those cases. Accordingly, the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 9 petitioners were released on bail after two days. The counsel also submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation and they are ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court, if this court grant them bail.

6. The Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the defacto complainant in BA No.4118/2025 opposed the bail application. The counsel for the petitioners seriously opposed the appearance of the defacto complainant stating that he has not filed any impleading petition. But, it is an admitted fact that he is appearing for the defacto complainant and a lawyer coming before this Court to argue for the defacto complainant, this Court need not interdict.

7. The Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that huge amount is misappropriated by the petitioners after collecting the same from the different victims. There are about 23 cases registered against the petitioners as on today. Public Prosecutor submitted that the custodial interrogation of the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 10 petitioners is necessary.

8. After hearing both sides, I think, there can be a direction to the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer can interrogate the petitioners. In these cases, the arrest can be recorded only in exceptional cases, that also for sufficient reasons. If the arrest of the petitioners is necessary, the Investigating Officer shall strictly follow the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Another [2014 (8) SCC 273]. Therefore, these bail applications are disposed of with the following directions: 1) The petitioners will surrender before the Investigating Officer within four weeks from today. 2) If the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer as directed above, the Investigating Officer is free to interrogate the petitioners. The Investigating Officer is free to ask the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 11 petitioners to appear continuously on three consecutive days, if necessary, but they shall not be arrested, till interrogation is over. 3) If the Investigating Officer feels that, the arrest is inevitable, even after interrogation, the Investigating Officer shall follow the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra) and shall produce the accused before the jurisdictional court on the date on which the arrest is recorded. 4) The petitioners are free to file bail application before the jurisdictional court at the time of producing them as directed above. If such a bail application is filed with advance copy to the prosecutor concerned, the jurisdictional court will consider that bail application in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders in it preferably on the date of filing of the same itself. While deciding the bail application, BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 12 the jurisdictional court shall scrupulously consider whether the Investigating Officer followed the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra). Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV.: SRI. NOUSHAD K.A SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4113/2025, 4123/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4113 OF 2025 CRIME NO.223/2025 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.592 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4: 1 2 3 4 R.J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683515 R.J JOSEPH AGED 57 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683515 JOHNSON R.J AGED 55 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683515 JOBY R J AGED 50 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 4 RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. C.S HRITHWICK, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4123 OF 2025 CRIME NO.203/2025 OF Munambom Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.595 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER : ( S )/ACCUSED R.J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. C.S HRITHWICK, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4124 OF 2025 CRIME NO.204/2025 OF Munambom Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2025 IN CRMC NO.594 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM / III ADDITIONAL MACT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER : ( S )/ACCUSED R J ANTONY AGED 58 YEARS, S/O R K JOSEPH, RANDUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 515 BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN N.P.ASHA D.FEROZE RESPONDENT ( S )/STATE : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV. : SRI. G.SUDHEER, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

01.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4118/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 7 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J –--------------------------------------------------------------- B.A. Nos.4118, 4113, 4124 and 4123 of 2025 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of April, 2025 O R D E R These Bail Applications are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. These bail applications are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these bail applications by a common order.

2. The petitioners are accused in Crime Nos.224/2025 & 223/2025 of Ernakulam Central Police Station and Crime Nos.204/2025 & 203/2025 of Munambam Police Station, Ernakulam. The above cases are registered inter alia under Sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC and also under Section 21 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short ‘BUDS Act’). BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 8

3. The prosecution case in brief is that the accused herein are the Managing Partners and Directors of Athira Gold and Silk, High Court Junction. It is alleged that the accused induced the defacto complainants in these cases to invest money in their business. The accused assured the defacto complainants that the invested amount would yield profits. Relying on the assurance of the accused persons, the defacto complainants in these cases deposited huge amount. But, the accused failed to return either the promised profit or the invested amount.

4. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and also the counsel appearing for the defacto complainant in BA No.4118/2025.

5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were arrested in crime No.222/2025 of Ernakulam Central Police Station. The police filed a remand report, in which two of these cases were mentioned. But, the arrest was not recorded in those cases. Accordingly, the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 9 petitioners were released on bail after two days. The counsel also submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation and they are ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court, if this court grant them bail.

6. The Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the defacto complainant in BA No.4118/2025 opposed the bail application. The counsel for the petitioners seriously opposed the appearance of the defacto complainant stating that he has not filed any impleading petition. But, it is an admitted fact that he is appearing for the defacto complainant and a lawyer coming before this Court to argue for the defacto complainant, this Court need not interdict.

7. The Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that huge amount is misappropriated by the petitioners after collecting the same from the different victims. There are about 23 cases registered against the petitioners as on today. Public Prosecutor submitted that the custodial interrogation of the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 10 petitioners is necessary.

8. After hearing both sides, I think, there can be a direction to the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer can interrogate the petitioners. In these cases, the arrest can be recorded only in exceptional cases, that also for sufficient reasons. If the arrest of the petitioners is necessary, the Investigating Officer shall strictly follow the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Another [2014 (8) SCC 273]. Therefore, these bail applications are disposed of with the following directions: 1) The petitioners will surrender before the Investigating Officer within four weeks from today. 2) If the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer as directed above, the Investigating Officer is free to interrogate the petitioners. The Investigating Officer is free to ask the BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 11 petitioners to appear continuously on three consecutive days, if necessary, but they shall not be arrested, till interrogation is over. 3) If the Investigating Officer feels that, the arrest is inevitable, even after interrogation, the Investigating Officer shall follow the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra) and shall produce the accused before the jurisdictional court on the date on which the arrest is recorded. 4) The petitioners are free to file bail application before the jurisdictional court at the time of producing them as directed above. If such a bail application is filed with advance copy to the prosecutor concerned, the jurisdictional court will consider that bail application in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders in it preferably on the date of filing of the same itself. While deciding the bail application, BAIL APPL. NOS.4118, 4113, 4124 AND 4123 OF 2025 12 the jurisdictional court shall scrupulously consider whether the Investigating Officer followed the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra). Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE