CASE LAWS ON SECTION 489-F PPC

CASE LAWS ON SECTION 489-F PPC
2007

1. 2007 P cr LJ 1492:
S.497 (5) Petition for cancellation of bail. (Bail cancels).
Bail granting order proceeded on mere technicalities and was conspicuous for the absence of any mention of respondent’s / accuser’s undertaking. Bail granted by Trial court offence under section 489-F P.P.C. did not attract the prohibitory clause of Sec 497(1) Cr P c ,but mere fact that the Prohibitory clause was not attracted, accused would not ipso facto become entitled to grant of bail.

2. 2007 P cr LJ 1064:
S.498 Petition for Pre-arrest bail (confirmed)
Offence under section 489-F PPC , though was non-bailable ,but High Court could not ignore the fact that the offence did not fall within the ambit of Prohibitory clause of Sec 497 Cr PC , and in the absence of exceptional circumstances.

3. 2007 P cr LJ 997:
Quashing of F.I.R. (Dismissed).
Most important ingredient of offence under section 489-F PPC. being issuance of a Cheque dishonestly, and was bounced by the bank.
Plea of the petitioner is that .during the pendency of Civil suit, Criminal proceedings could not be initiated.

4. 2007 P cr LJ 388:
497(5) &498 Cr P C. Cancellation of bail.(Petition Accepted).
Petition to the extent of co-accused was dismissed because no role was attributed to the co-accused in the F.I.R. and investigation, Prosecutions whole evidence revolves around the accused who was main culprit. So the petition is accepted to the extent of main accused.

5. 2007 YLR 1264 :
S 497 Cr P C. (Admitted Post Arrest Bail)
F.I.R. Lodged with delay of four years against accused and co-accused .Complainant alleged in F.I.R that despite payment of amount to accused, no land was got allotted in his favour .and matter was reported to Punchayat accused gave to complainant cheques which were later on dishonored .That complainant himself was involved in case registered under Sec 489-F PPC .Sec 468,470, and 420 PPC had been added later. Pre-arrest bail of co-accused had been confirmed by High Court. Rule of consistency was attracted to the case of accused and admitted post arrest bail.

6. 2007 YLR 1277:
Sec 497 Cr P C (Bail admitted)
The amount of Cheque in question had not been mentioned in the F.I.R. at all. Cheque was issued about three months prior to reporting of matter to the police. Neither Cheque issued by accused nor its attested copy was available on record of the case and no Bank officer had been cited as witness.

7. 2007 YLR 1280:
Sec.497 Cr P C. (Bail granted)
Section 489-F PPC, Maximum punishment for offence under section 489-F PPC, not more than three years, Present case was not covered by prohibition contained in section 497 Cr PC. F.I.R. did not indicate the purpose for which a huge amount was given to accused by the complainant and did not show any effort for seeking the return of said amount.

8. 2007 YLR 1120.
Section 497 Cr P C. (Bail Granted ).
Section 489-F . Maximum Punishment not more than three years. Not fall in Prohibitory Clause of 497 Cr P C . F.I.R. did not indicate the purpose for which a huge amount was given to accused by the complainant and did not show any effort for seeking the return of said amount.

9. 2007 YLR 1354.
Section 497 Cr P C. (Bail Granted).
Section 489-F. Accused was in Jail since one year. Challan was submitted but no progress. Offence did not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr P C. ( Keeping accused behind the bars for an indefinite period of time would not serve or advance prosecution’s case, rather same would amount to punishment before conviction, which was not permissible under CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE ).

10. 2007 YLR 1020 (1) :
Section 498 Cr.P.C. ( Pre arrest bail was dismissed)
Section 489-F. Accused failed to appear before the court and had also not furnished surety bonds as directed by the court. Accused who stood nominated in F.I.R, had misused concession of Pre-arrest bail. Bail application was dismissed.


11. 2007 P.Cr.L.J 100:
S.489-F-Bail. Grant of---
Accused issued a cheque as earnest money to complainant, which prima facie was not an obligation—Real intention of the parties with regard to the agreement would be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence—Offence for which accused was charged ,did not fall under prohibited clause of Sec.497,Cr.P.C.—Accused was behind the bars and no more required for further investigation—To keep accused behind the bars for an indefinite period would not serve any use full purpose--- Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.