K.M. Susela v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/13TH MAGHA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 102 of 2015 () ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 6/2014 OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPATION BUREAU,THRISSUR UNIT ------------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
------------------------------------------------- K.M. SUSELA,AGED 51 YEARS, ARRAKKAL HOUSE, AALPPARA P.O., KANNARA, FORMER SECRETARY SREE NARAYANA POWER LOOM INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, NOW WORKING AS CLERK, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, PATTIKKAD BRANCH, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.C.B.ANUROOPA RESPONDENT/STATE:
-------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SHIBU GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No.102 of 2015 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2015
O R D E R
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2.
Petitioner is the second accused in Vigilance Crime No.6/2014 of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Thrissur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(i) d (ii) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120B read with Section 34 IPC.
3.
The petitioner was the Secretary of Sree Narayana Power Loom Industrial Co-operative Society. It is alleged that she along with the President of the said Society had executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Johny Chirayath for the sale of a piece of property of the Co-operative Society. It is alleged that the said Johny Chirayath had executed sale deed in respect of the said
BA.102/2015 : 2 :
property as the power holder for the value, which is less than the consideration of the property shown in the Power of Attorney.
4.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.
5.
The investigating officer has reported that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the continued investigation of this case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the present stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 6.
In the result, this bail application is allowed and the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioner, is directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest on his executing a bond for `25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and
BA.102/2015 : 3 :
subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Mondays and Thursdays, commencing from 09.02.2015 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer.
(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any offence while on bail.
It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail.
Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/02/02 // True Copy // PA to Judge