High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 08 KL CK 0028

Gireesh Kumar KC vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 3 August 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Viju Abraham, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 6130 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 390 words

Viju Abraham, J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.31 of 2021 of NRI SAS Nagar Police Station, Punjab alleging offence punishable under Section 420 IPC.

3.

The petitioner is a Non Resident Indian employed as the Managing Director of a reputed garment company at Doha. It is submitted that on 01/08/2022 by about 4:00 PM, when he landed in the Nedumbassery International Airport from Doha, Qatar, he was detained by the Immigration Department. Later he was then informed that the detention is based on a Look Out Circular issued against him at the instance of M/s Chauhan Enterprises, Chandigarh. Thereafter he was handed over to the 2nd respondent by about 6:30 PM. As informed by the petitioner, his lawyer contacted the office of the 2nd respondent. It was thereafter informed that Crime No 31 of 2021 of NRI, SAS Nagar Police Station, Punjab has been registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable U/s 420 IPC and so the Look Out Circular was issued.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been arrested in connection with the abovesaid crime. It is further submitted that the petitioner is aged 62 years and has no other criminal antecedents and the alleged transaction is purely of a civil nature and he is ready and willing to approach the jurisdictional court in the State of Punjab and seeks for bail, for which he requires some time. He also further submits that he is taking all earnest steps to settle the matter with the defacto complainant.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has defrauded the defacto complainant by promising to supply garments, etc.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegation, and further that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent, I am inclined to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a period of two weeks from today, so as to enable him to approach the jurisdictional court seeking bail, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam.

With the abovesaid limited direction, the bail application is disposed of.