AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail.
The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.453/2026 of Guruvayoor Temple Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 316(2) and 318(4) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused No.1 and the applicant, who are husband and wife respectively, with an intention to deceive the defacto complainant, the accused No.1 claimed as bank manager and showed forged ID card and collected Rs.73,53,400/- (Rupees Seventy Three Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand Four Hundred only) from the defacto complainant to his bank account and a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs only) in cash, during the period from 23.08.2024 to 24.04.2026 making him believe that he will get 3% monthly interest, once he do the show money funding for NRI students. Thereafter, the accused persons neither paid the agreed interests or returned the amount and thereby committed the aforementioned offences.
I have heard Sri.B.Surjith, the learned counsel for the applicant, Smt.Jisliya K.Joshy, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and Sri.Thomas Sabu Vadakekut, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, she is entitled to bail. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if she is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
I went through the FI Statement. The entire allegations are against the accused No.1. The definite case of the defacto complainant is that the amount was transferred to the account of the accused No.1. The applicant is the wife of the accused No.1. Annexure A5 would show that the marriage between the applicant and the accused No.1 was solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on 18.08.2025 and Annexure A12 would show that their customary marriage took place on 17.01.2026. According to the applicant, the money was paid even prior to that. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, her custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-
The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of her arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.
The applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting herself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.
The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Monday until further orders. She shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.