Amal Baby vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

This is an application seeking regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 & 5 in Crime No.2570/2022 of Kottayam East Police Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 324, 294(b), 506(i), 326 and 323 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

According to the prosecution, on 29.12.2022, at about 5.00 p.m., the accused trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and demanded arrears of loan amount allegedly availed by the husband of the defacto complainant from ESAF bank, for the purchase of an autorickshaw, and inflicted cut injury on his finger and thereby committed the offences alleged.

Sri.R.Bindu (Sasthamangalam), the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that petitioners were arrested on 30.12.2022 and has been in custody since then. The learned counsel also pointed out that petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that petitioners 2 and 4 are bank employees while other petitioners are persons engaged by the bank for recovery purposes. It was also submitted that due to the violent method of recovery attempted, the incident occurred and that petitioners had inflicted a cut injury on the finger of the husband of the defacto complainant and since the incident is serious in nature, detention of the petitioners ought to be continued.

I have considered the rival contentions. Even though the bank or any person employed by it or appointed by it has no authority of any nature to resort to violence while attempting recovery of loan, considering the circumstances that petitioners have been in detention from 30.12.2022, I am of the view that further detention is not essential. Though this Court deprecate the practice of bank and other employees in resorting to modes of violence under the guise of recovery, I am inclined to allow this application on the following conditions :-

(a) Petitioners shall be released on bail on themselves executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall they tamper with the evidence or contact the defacto complainant or her family members.

(d) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while they are on bail.

(e) Petitioners shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.

The bail application is allowed as above.