Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TOMY MATHEW versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI)

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


TOMY MATHEW v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI) - Bail Appl No. 4285 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 13071 (13 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 4285 of 2007()

1. TOMY MATHEW,
... Petitioner

2. BABU CHERIYAN,

Vs

1. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI),
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :13/07/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A.No. 4285 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 13th day of July, 2007

O R D E R

Application for regular bail. The petitioners are accused 4 and

5. They face allegations, inter alia, under Section 420 I.P.C. Altogether there are five accused persons. On the complaint of the first accused that the investigation by the local police is not conducting properly, the C.B.I. has taken over the investigation as directed by this Court. The story does appear to be the same. The petitioners were arrested on 27.2007. What is the precise allegations against accused 4 and 5? To this pointed question, I must say, satisfactory explanation is not forthcoming from the counsel. It is submitted that the 4th accused had impersonated himself to be the first accused and had availed a loan from a bank. What then is the allegation against the 2nd accused? It is said that in respect of the same loan before the same bank, the second accused had also impersonated himself to be the first accused. So much about the 4th accused. What is the allegation against the 5th accused? It is submitted that he had forged a letter before the Embassy, the details of which are not forthcoming. B.A.No. 4285 of 2007 2

2. Notwithstanding the opposition by the learned Prosecutor, I am satisfied that this is a fit case where this Court will not be justified in authorising further detention of the petitioners in custody. Subject to appropriate conditions, the petitioners can be released on bail now.

3. In the result: 1) This application is allowed. 2) The petitioners shall be released on bail on the following terms and conditions.

(a) The petitioners shall execute bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to be satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.

(b) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 12 noon on all Mondays for a period of two months and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.