Kerala High Court

Bail Appl./9080/2016 of JIO MATHEW Vs THE STATE OF KERALA on 30 December 2016

Cites 0, Cited by 0

COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/9TH POUSHA, 1938 Bail Appl..No. 9080 of 2016 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 966/2015 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU

FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/9TH POUSHA, 1938

Bail Appl..No. 9080 of 2016 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 966/2015 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:-------------------------- JIO MATHEW, AGED 38 YEARS S/O MATHEW JOSEPH, PUNNAPURACKAL HOUSE, ARATTUVAZHY, ARYAD, ALAPPUZHA, NOW RESIDING AT RENTED HOUSE OF BIJU JOSE, KOKKOTHU VEEDU, THATHAMPALLY, ARYAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN SMT.S.INDU

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT.:

---------------------------

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

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

sm

A.M.BABU, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No.9080 of 2016

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30[th] day of December, 2016

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

O R D E R

Petitioner is the 1[st] accused in crime no.966/2015 of theMattancherry police station. There are altogether three accusedpersons. The offence alleged against them is one punishable undersection 420 of the IPC read with IPC 34. The petitioner is incustody.

2. The prosecution case goes as follows: The petitioner andhis wife, who is the 2[nd] accused, representing themselves to run acharitable trust called the Holy Angels charitable trust collectedRs.35,00,000/- in three instalments from the de facto complainantmaking him to believe that within a period of 30 daysRs.1,25,00,000/- would be returned. Believing the words of theaccused persons, the de facto complainant entrusted with themRs.35,00,000/-, but he was not given the offered amount ofRs.1,25,00,000/-.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. I

am shown the report submitted to him by the investigating officer.The report suggests that there are materials against the petitioner.Annex-B is a copy of the order of this Court in B.A.No.8758 of 2016. Asper the said order the wife of the petitioner was granted regular bail.Bail was granted to her on the ground that the money was received byher husband. It was also made clear in the said order that grant of bailto the 2[nd] accused shall not in any manner go to the benefit of anyother accused in the case. The petitioner is no doubt in custody since17.11.2016. But the investigation is in its initial stage still. The 3[rd]accused is to be apprehended. The learned Public Prosecutor oninstruction has submitted that three more crime cases of the similarnature are pending against the petitioner in three different policestations in three different districts. I am in agreement with thelearned Public Prosecutor that grant of bail to the petitioner at thisstage would be detrimental to the other cases under investigationapart from this particular case. I am also impressed with thesubmission that the possibility of repeating similar crime cannot beruled out. For these reasons, I am of the considered opinion that thepetitioner is not entitled to bail at present.

In the result, the application is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.M.BABU, JUDGE

sm/

//true copy//

P.A.To Judge

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead