AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking pre-arrest bail.
The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.898/2026 of Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant, being the Cashier cum Accountant and the accused No.2, being the General Manager, of Vidhya Residency Hotel Cum Bar at Perumbilavu, owned by the defacto complainant, the accused Nos.1 and 2, in furtherance of their common intention to cheat the defacto complainant during the period from 2022 to 2025, committed financial misappropriation in the income and expenditure accounts of the institution as well as in the signed blank cheque leaves entrusted to the applicant by the defacto complainant and a loss of Rs.4.50 crores was caused to the defacto complainant and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.
I have heard Sri.P.K.Varghese, the learned counsel for the applicant 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 present case. 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, 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.
The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on her part. Specific overt act has been attributed against the applicant.
The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if she is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked.
The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.