Key Points

The Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to the producers of the hit film "Manjummel Boys" in an alleged cheating case. The court ruled that custodial interrogation wasn’t necessary as the dispute primarily involved financial transactions. The producers, including Shawn Anthony and Soubin Shahir, were accused of diverting funds from a Rs 7 crore investment. The next hearing is scheduled for July 7-8 for further investigation.

Key Points: Kerala HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to Manjummel Boys Producers

  • Kerala HC denies custodial interrogation citing documentary evidence
  • Producers Shawn Anthony and Soubin Shahir granted bail
  • Dispute involves Rs 7 crore investment and profit-sharing
  • Next hearing set for July 7-8
3 min read

Kerala HC grants anticipatory bail to producers of hit film 'Manjummel Boys'

Kerala High Court grants bail to Manjummel Boys producers in alleged cheating case, citing lack of need for custodial interrogation.

"Since the distribution of profits and the mode of investment are the source of this dispute, I am of the view that majority of those matters could be governed by documentary evidence. – Kerala High Court"

Kochi, June 26

The Kerala High Court on Thursday granted anticipatory bail to producers of the hit Malayalam film "Manjummel Boys" in an alleged cheating case regarding the agreement in sharing the proceeds of the film.

Hearing the plea of the producers on Thursday, the High Court pointed out that a coordinate bench of the High Court had earlier refused a plea for quashing the criminal proceedings after the investigation officer in the case filed an objection stating that out of the amount invested by the complainant, a portion was diverted to the personal account of the accused.

The High Court then pointed out that the relationship between the parties is governed primarily by business transactions and that the dispute falls in the commercial sphere.

"Since a learned Single Judge of this Court has already refused to quash the proceedings, it cannot be held that this is a purely commercial dispute. An element of criminality can be said to be existent. However, the question before this Court is whether the same warrants custodial interrogation," it said.

It then held that this is a case where custodial interrogation is not necessary and further pointed out that "since the distribution of profits and the mode of investment carried out by the parties are the source of this dispute, I am of the view that majority of those matters that could be governed by documentary evidence…"

Therefore the High Court was of the opinion that limited custody of the petitioners can be granted in the case to complete the investigation and asked the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer on July 7 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., and if need be, on 8th July as well and granted them anticipatory bail.

The charge against the producers was that they cheated the complainant and made him invest Rs 7 crore on a promise that he would be paid 40 per cent of the profits of the film, which did not happen despite the film turning a huge hit. In the High Court while the producers argued that this was a purely commercial dispute, the public prosecutor submitted that as per the investigation conducted so far, the petitioners have prima facie committed the offences alleged besides pointing out that the producers are attempting to cover up the offences committed under the guise of a civil dispute to delay payments.

Those who got the interim relief included Shawn Anthony, Soubin Shahir and Shahir’s father.

The complainant is Siraj Valiyathara Hameed.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rajesh K.
The court has taken a balanced approach here. When big money is involved in films, such disputes are common. But diverting funds to personal accounts is serious if proven true. Hope justice prevails for both sides. 🤞
P
Priya M.
As someone from Kerala, I'm disappointed. Manjummel Boys was such a pride for Malayalam cinema, now this controversy. Producers should have been more transparent about profit sharing. Why spoil the film's legacy?
A
Arjun S.
The court's decision makes sense - no need for custodial interrogation when documents can prove everything. This seems more like a business dispute than criminal case. But 7 crore is no small amount!
S
Sunita R.
Film industry needs better financial regulations. Too many cases like this where investors get cheated. Just because a film becomes hit doesn't mean producers can ignore agreements. Strict laws needed!
V
Vikram J.
The complainant invested 7 crore expecting 40% profit share? That's a huge gamble! Film business is always risky. Maybe both parties should have had better legal contracts before investing.
M
Meena P.
As a law student, I find the court's reasoning very sound. They've distinguished between commercial disputes and criminal elements properly. This sets a good precedent for similar cases in entertainment industry.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50