ABDUL AZEEZ v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Resultantly, the bail application is disposed of by
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 406, 409, 420
- Financial Establishments Act, 2013
- Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 ss. 3, 21, 23
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that, pursuant to the order dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and his interrogation has been completed. Hence, the interim order can be made absolute, subject to additional conditions. The…
Judgment
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 SHEREEFA AGED 46 YEARS DAUGHTER OF ABOOBACKER K A, BEKAL KUNNU HOUSE, ILLIYAS NAGAR, PALLIKKARA VILLAGE, KASARGODE, KERALA, PIN – 560078 OTHER PRESENT: SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A.No.2058/2024 -:2:- Dated this the 9th day of April, 2024
O R D E R The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for an order of pre-arrest bail.
The petitioner is the 9th accused in Crime No.988/2020 of the Bekal Police Station, Kasargod, registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 5 of the Kerala Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2013 and Section 3 read with Sections 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.
When the bail application came up for consideration on 22.03.2024, this Court passed an interim order, by directing the petitioner to surrender B.A.No.2058/2024 -:3:- before the Investigating Officer within three days from the date of order and subject himself to interrogation.
Heard; Sri. Muralikrishnan C., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C. S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
Operative part
The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that, pursuant to the order dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and his interrogation has been completed. Hence, the interim order can be made absolute, subject to additional conditions. The said submission is recorded. Resultantly, the bail application is disposed of by making the interim order dated 22.03.2024 absolute, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation and for the purpose of B.A.No.2058/2024 -:4:- investigation as and when the Investigating Officer directs;
(ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner;
(iii)The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence while he is on bail.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the jurisdictional Court;
(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions 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 also be filed before the court below.
(vii)Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to B.A.No.2058/2024 -:5:- 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]. DST/09.04.24 Sd/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE //True copy// P.A. To Judge
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Resultantly, the bail application is disposed of by
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 406, 409, 420; Financial Establishments Act, 2013; Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 — ss. 3, 21, 23.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.