SAHARSH B. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.384/CB/CUIV/TVM/2018, which was originally registered as Crime No.356 of 2018 of the Pudukkad Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of IPC . The petitioner is arrayed as an accused in his alleged capacity as a Director of M/s. Cissil Retail Management Pvt. Ltd, a Company formed for carrying out retail business through hyper markets, supermarkets etc. Many persons were persuaded to invest money in the venture on promise of higher returns. Contrary to the promise, no profit, or even the amount invested, was returned to the investors and thereupon, series of complaints were filed by the investors and crimes registered at various Police Stations. The petitioner was arrested during the course of investigation into the cases, which had been handed over to the Crime Branch as per the order of this Court in W.P.(C) No.1937 of 2017. Having failed in his attempt to get bail from the Magistrate Courts concerned, the petitioner had approached this Court. By Annexure A1 order, this Court allowed the applications for bail on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.25,00,0000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. It was further observed that the jurisdictional magistrate may not insist for independent sureties in all the cases.

(2.) On the strength of Annexure A1, the petitioner was granted bail by some of the jurisdictional magistrate courts, accepting the common sureties offered by the petitioner.

(3.) This Crl.M.C is filed aggrieved by Annexure A6 order by which the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Irinjalakkuda rejected the application for execution of bail bond submitted by the petitioner on the premise that the sureties offered by the petitioner had already stood as surety for the petitioner in other cases.