Prashanth P v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/8TH ASHADHA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 7570 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 366/2013 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DIST. ........

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

----------------------------------- PRASHANTH P., AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.PRAKASHAN, MUTTATHU PARAMBU, KUTHIRAPANTHI WARD, THIRUVAMPADY P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

BY ADV. SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI.

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

-------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.S. SREEJITH.

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J ----------------------------- B.A.No.7570 OF 2014 ----------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2015

O R D E R

-------------- Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2.

Petitioner is a sales executive in the business conducted by the husband of the first informant. 3.

The prosecution case is that he forged receipts on the basis of which he collected money from the customers of his employer and misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees One lakh ninety thousand only) and thus committed the offences under Sections 406, 408, 420, 465 and 468 of Indian Penal Code.

4.

Heard.

5.

The learned counsel submits that the petitioner left the business of the first informant's husband, which is why this false case was got registered. The police have seized some receipts which were allegedly forged by the petitioner. The total amount involved in the incident is Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees One lakh ninety thousand only). It is necessary to ascertain who committed the forgery and

B.A.No.7570 OF 2014 how it was committed. It is also necessary to ascertain whether the Petitioner has issued other forged receipts. For these purposes his custodial interrogation may be necessary. This is not a fit case to grant him anticipatory bail.

In the result, this application is dismissed. sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE R.AV //True Copy// PA to Judge