Courts deny Kamarudheen's bail petition and plea seeking cancellation of FIR

The High Court denied IUML MLA MC Kamarudheen's plea seeking cancellation of FIR in the jewellery fraud case and the Hosdurg Court rejected his bail plea
Courts deny Kamarudheen's bail petition and plea seeking cancellation of FIR
M C Kamarudheen

Manjeswaram MLA and Indian Union Muslim League MC Kamarudheen suffered a blow today when the Kerala High Court rejected his plea seeking cancellation of the FIR and the Hosdurg Magistrate Court rejected his bail plea in the investment fraud case.

The court, in its order, stated that granting Kamarudheen bail at such an early stage of the case would disturb the probe as he is influential and the case could be sabotaged. With 11 new cases added on top of the current list, the investigating team has approached the court to register arrest in more cases.

Kamarudheen was arrested last week in connection with cases registered against him in a multi-crore investment fraud. He was arrested under sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code, the provisions of Kerala Protection of Interests of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act and section 3 and 5 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act.

Kamarudheen, along with others, started Fashion Gold International in 2006 at Kasaragod. While the Manjeshwaram MLA is the company’s Chairman, Pookoya Thangal is the Director. They had reportedly received over Rs 140 crore from over 750 investors, a majority of whom are Muslim League supporters and their families. While the company grew to include three more gold companies with the same address, it shut down operations in December 2019. The problem started when the two IUML members failed to return investors their money.

The prosecution told the Kerala High Court yesterday that Kamarudheen was the brain behind the scam and that he had used his political influence to defraud the people.

Kamarudheen’s lawyer, however, claimed that his client’s case did not come under the purview of cheating as the amount deposited by the investors could not be returned as the business was at a loss.

The prosecution dismissed his argument stating that although the investors were promised their money will be returned, it was not, and hence a cheating case is valid.

While in the initial stages, UDF leaders had explained that Kamarudheen’s case is that of business failure and not cheating as the peope allege. However, as the investigation tightened, UDF members as well as the League distanced themselves from the Manjeshwaram MLA and told media that it was “his responsibility”.

No stories found.
The NationWide
www.thenationwide.in