IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST APRIL 2009 / 1ST VAISAKHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1792 of 2009(F) ------------------------------------------ (CRIME NO. 564/08 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) .................... PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- RAJAN,S/O.VELAPPAN, SABARI NIVAS, KODANGAVILA, ATHIYANNOOR, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENTS/ STATE: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, CBCID, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. C.M. KAMMAPPU. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- B.A.No.1792 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 21st April, 2009. ORDER This is an application for regular bail filed by the 5th accused in crime 564/2008 of Medical college police station, Thiruvananthapuram, now pending as CBCID Crime No. 221/CR/TVM/2008 registered under sections 406, 409, 120B and 420 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. The allegation against the petitioner and other accused is that with dishonest inducement and misrepresentation made by the accused persons to the effect that they would give exorbitant rate of interest on deposits, the de facto complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1.55 lakhs in the financial establishment run by the accused in the name and style ''Nest Investment Solutions” at Chalakuzhi Road within the jurisdiction of Medical College Police station, Thiruvananthapuram. Petitioner is the father of Ist accused and active partner of all the fraudulent establishments run by the Ist accused as Managing Director on several parts of Thiruvananthapuram city. BA 1792 OF 2009 :-2-: The petitioner herein was originally arrested on 10.9.2008 connected with CBCID Crime 169/CR/Tvpm/08 and subsequently produced in the court below on 12-2-2009 and thus his arrest is recorded in the present case and thereafter he is in judicial custody in this case also. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no offence is attracted against the Petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is working as a Peon in a Co- Operative Bank and he had no connection with the business whatsoever conducted by the Ist accused - son of the Petitioner. It is also the case of the counsel that investigation of the case is already over and the petitioner has got bail in some cases. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that as the investigation is already over, the further detention of the petitioner is not required. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner is entitled to get bail , especially, for the reason that that, due to prolonged custody his health is ruined. BA NO.1792 OF 2009 :-3-: 4. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is also an active participant in the fraud played on various individuals by which huge amounts were collected and misappropriated. It is also pointed out that all the cases are under investigation for which a special Investigation Team of CBCID was constituted and the release of the petitioner will adversely affect the investigation. 5. I have carefully considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. From the materials available on record and the allegations, it appears to be that the petitioner is the 5th accused in this crime and father of the Ist accused and also the partner of all the fraudulent financial establishments run by the Ist accused as the Managing Director. It is also the allegation that making dishonest and fraudulent representation, the accused including the petitioner collected crores of rupees from the general public, who deposited their valuable savings, by way of deposit, believing the misrepresentation made by the BANO.1792 OF 2009 :-4-: accused that exorbit ant rate of interest would be given on such deposit. Amassing of money by cheating and misrepresentation and thereby exploiting the people is a recent trade and business seen in our State to a large extent and the police is taking earnest step to prevent such criminal offences by taking appropriate proceedings. Therefore, the release of the petitioner is likely to adversely affect the investigation and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get bail in this case. In the result, there is no merit in the petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- This is an application for regular bail filed by the 5th accused in crime 564/2008 of Medical College police station, Thiruvananthpauram, now pending as CBCID Crime No. 220/CR/TVM/2008 registered under sections 406, 409, 120B and 420 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. The allegation against the petitioner and other accused is that with dishonest inducement and misrepresentation made by the accused persons to the effect that they would give exorbitant rate of interest on deposits, the de facto complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1.55 lakhs in the financial establishment run by the accused in the name and style ''Nest'' at Punnappuram within the jurisdiction of Vanchiyoor Police station, Thiruvananthapuram. Petitioner is the father of Ist accused and active partner of all the fraudulent official establishments run by the Ist accused as Managing Director on several parts of Thiruvananthapuram city. The petitioner herein was originally arrested on 10.9.2008 connected with CBCID Crime 169/CR/Tvpm/08 and subsequently produced in the court below on 12-2-2009 and thus his arrest is recored in the present case and thereafter he is in judicial custody in this case also. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no offence is attracted against the Petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is working as a Peon in a Co- Operative Bank and he had no connection with the business whatever conducted by the Ist accused - son of the Petitioner. It is also the case of the counsel that investigation of the case is already over and the petitioner has got bail in some cases. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that as the investigation is already over, the further detention of the petitioner is not required. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner is entitled to get bail , especially, for the reason that that, due to prolonged custody his health is ruined. 4. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is also an active participant in the fraud played on various individuals by which huge amounts were collected and misappropriated. It is also pointed out that all the cases are under investigation for which a special Investigation Team of CBCID was constituted and the release of the petitioner will adversely affect the investigation. 5. I have carefully considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. From the materials available on record, it appears that the petitioner who is the 7th accused in this crime and father of the Ist accused and also the partner of all the fraudulent financial establishments run by the Ist accused as the Managing Director. It is also the allegation that making dishonest and fraudulent representation, the accused including the petitioner collected crores of rupees from the public who deposited their valuable savings under the lock by way of deposit believing the misrepresentation made by the accused that exorbitant rate of interest would be given on such deposit. Amassing of money by cheating and misrepresentation and thereby exploiting the people is a trade and business scene in our State to a large extent and the police is taking earnest step to prevent such criminal offences by taking appropriate proceedings. Therefore, the release of the petitioner is likely to adversely affect the investigation and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get bail in this case at this stage. In the result, there is no merit in the petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/-