MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Civil Nature of Allegations Doesn’t Warrant Custodial Interrogation: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail in Co-operative Society Fraud Case

24 December 2024 8:10 PM

By: sayum


High Court emphasizes lack of mens rea and petitioners’ non-involvement during the period of alleged fraudulent deposits. The Kerala High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to Muhammed Haneefa K. and Kumaran P.T., accused in a case of inducement and cheating related to a co-operative society. The judgment delivered by Justice C.S. Dias highlighted the civil nature of the allegations and the absence of mens rea, underscoring that the petitioners were not involved in the society’s affairs during the period the alleged fraud took place.

The case pertains to Crime No. 676/2023 registered at the Sreekrishnapuram Police Station, Palakkad. The petitioners, who became the President and Honorary Secretary of the Thiruvazhiyode Housing Co-operative Society Limited on February 10, 2021, were accused of inducing the de facto complainant to invest ₹72,44,000 in the society with a promise of higher interest returns. However, the deposits, which matured in October 2023, were not returned, leading to charges under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Justice C.S. Dias, while granting bail, observed that the petitioners were not in charge of the society when the deposits were made. “The petitioners were elected to their positions well after the alleged transactions occurred,” noted the court. This timing was crucial in determining that the petitioners could not have had the intent to defraud the complainant.

The court emphasized the petitioners’ lack of mens rea, citing that they had been elected after the deposits were made and had continued paying interest to the complainant. “The society faced financial difficulties, leading to non-repayment of matured amounts, but this does not establish fraudulent intent,” Justice Dias stated.

The court imposed several conditions to ensure the petitioners’ cooperation with the investigation, including surrendering before the investigating officer, executing bonds, and surrendering their passports. Any violation of these conditions could lead to the cancellation of bail.

Justice C.S. Dias remarked, “The allegations made in the FIR are more civil in nature, though that is a matter to be investigated and decided at the time of trial.” He further added, “The petitioners’ custodial interrogation is not necessary, and they have made valid grounds to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 438 of the Code.”

The Kerala High Court’s decision to grant pre-arrest bail highlights the judiciary’s nuanced approach in distinguishing between criminal intent and civil disputes. By recognizing the timing of the petitioners’ involvement and the nature of the allegations, the judgment ensures that the investigation continues without unnecessary custodial interrogation, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Date of Decision: 3rd July 2024

Latest Legal News