Allowed

Shihabudheen M.I v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jun 2012Bail Appl./2874/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail appeal for forgery under IPC, the High Court directed the accused to surrender for investigation within 10 days. Bail was granted subject to stringent conditions including execution of bond with sureties, strict availability for interrogation, and passport production, given the suspicious circumstances surrounding the forged insurance claim.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail subject to execution of bond with sureties, surrender for interrogation within 10 days, monthly appearance to the Investigating Officer, and submission of original passport.

Shihabudheen M.I Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/21ST JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2874 of 2012 ()

¶6

-----------------------------(CRIME NO.445/2012 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S):

¶8

SHIHABUDHEEN M.I, AGED 32 YEARS, MANATH VADAKKEPUTHUANPURAYIL,

¶9

THRIKKAKARA P.O., KOCHI.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶11

RESPONDENTS & STATE:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA,

¶13

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶14

HIGH COURT OF KERALA,

¶15

ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.445/2012 OF KALAMASSERY

¶16

POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) 682 031.

¶17

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,

¶18

KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION,

¶19

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.445/2012 OF

¶20

KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION,

¶21

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) 683 104.

¶22

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. JASMINE.V.H.

¶23

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

Kss

¶25

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶26

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 2874 OF 2012

¶27

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶28

Dated this the 11^th day of June, 2012

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.445/2012 of Kalamassery Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged against him are under sections 468, 471 and 420 of IPC.

¶31

The bus owned by the accused met with an accident. The injured preferred a claim before the MACT, Ernakulam. It is alleged that the insurance certificate was produced to the effect that vehicle involved in the accident was having a valid insurance as on the date of occurrence.

¶32

But later, it was found that the insurance certificate produced before the Tribunal is a forged one. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not receive any summons nor did he engage a lawyer to appear before the MACT in O.P.(MV)No.2205/2008 on his behalf. It was found that the insurance certificate produced before the

¶33

B.A.No.2874/2012 -2-

¶34

Tribunal was a forged one. When it was so found O.P.(MV) No.2205/2008 was withdrawn. It seems there is something fishy in the matter. If the party had no interest in advocating the signature, seal in the vakalath purported to be a forged one, that may also be investigated and found out. The role of the person involved in the matter has to be probed into detail. If the MACT claim petition was withdrawn subsequently, that also may speak volumes.

¶35

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶36

The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. The Investigating Officer can get the specimen handwriting, signature and thumb impression of the petitioner. If investigation is not completed he can request the learned Magistrate for further custody of the accused. The learned Magistrate is inclined to grant bail, it can be granted but subject to the following conditions:

¶37

B.A.No.2874/2012

¶38

-3-

¶39

a. The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties.

¶40

b. The accused shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and that he should appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶41

c. The accused shall produce his original passport before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate. d. The accused will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not

¶42

B.A.No.2874/2012

¶43

-4-

¶44

commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶45

e. The accused and the sureties shall not leave the state of Kerala without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. f. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc.

¶46

Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶47

¶48

//True copy//

¶49

P.A. to Judge

Shihabudheen M.I v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shihabudheen M.I v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

George Alexander Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Johny Mathew Vs State Oe Kerala

Jerome Vs State of Kerala

Jose Francis Vs State