Crl.M.C. No. 2118 of 2012, where petitioner challenged charge of cheating under Scrutiny of employment certificate forgery. Denied quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Application for quashing final report and charge against petitioner was dismissed; pending interlocutory applications also dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2014/13TH ASHADHA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 2118 of 2012 ()
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 307/2011 of J.M.F.C., PARAVOOR, KOLLAM.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 :
SAROJINI AMMA, D/O.KUTTY AMMA, GEETHANGALI, MULANKADAKAM, KOLLAM WEST, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN.
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. THE MANAGER,
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.BINDU GOPINATH. R2 BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 2118 of 2012 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
| ANNEXURE A1. | A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.154/2008 DATED 26.2.2008 OF CHATHANOOR P.S. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2. | A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 31.1.2011 IN CRIME NO.154/2008 OF CHATHANOOR P.S. |
| ANNEXURE A3. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT OF CW1 IN CC NO.307/2011 OF JFMC PARAVOOR. |
| ANNEXURE A4. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE OF ACCUSED NO.2 15/5/1998. |
| ANNEXURE A5. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE OF ACCUSED NO.3 DATED 15.5.1998. |
| ANNEXURE A6. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CONFIRMATION REGARDING THE PAY OF THE 2ND ACCUSED DATED 29.5.1998. |
| ANNEXURE A7. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CONFIRMATION REGARDING THE PAY OF THE 3RD ACCUSED 6.6.1998. |
| ANNEXURE A8. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23.3.2010. |
| ANNEXURE A9. | A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.5.2010. |
| ANNEXURE A10. | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE CW2 DATED 2.1.2010. |
| RESPONDENTS' E | XHIBITS : |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE B1 | LETTER DATED 29-05-2013 ISSUED FROM THE DIRECTORATE OF COIR. |
| ANNEXURE B2 | LETTER DATED 1-11-2012 ISSUED FROM THE DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. |
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
amk
A.HARIPRASAD, J.
Crl.M.C No.2118 of 2012
Dated this the 4th day of July, 2014.
O R D E R
Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Petitioner is
the fifth accused in Crime No.154/2008 of Chathannoor Police Station registered under Sections 420 and 468 r/w Section 34 I.P.C. Annexure A2 is the final report in the crime. The allegations therein, in brief, are as follows :
The accused persons with an intention to cheat the Kerala State Financial Enterprises (second respondent) committed forgery. The first accused subscribed a chit on 28-06-1998 and after winning the prize, offered the accused 2, 3 and 4 as sureties for securing future payments. They were employees under the fifth accused (petitioner). It is alleged that forged salary certificates showing false details were submitted by the accused 2 to 4 to secure payment of money by the second respondent to the first accused. Annexures A4 and A5 are the employment certificates pertaining to the two sureties duly
Crl.M.C No.2118 of 2012 2
signed by the petitioner. In Annexure A4, at the first blush it can be seen that the date of the continuous service of one surety originally written as 16-06-1948 has been corrected as 16-06-1968 and in Annexure A5 it is corrected from 1974 to 1984. According to the prosecution case, these forged employment certificates were used by them to cheat the second respondent.
Crl.M.C No.2118 of 2012 3
genuineness of Annexures A4 and A5, contended the learned counsel for the second respondent. In other words, the entire details in Annexures A4 and A5 were to be confirmed by the petitioner. On going through the materials in Annexures A6 and A7, it can be seen that the request made by the second respondent is to certify the genuineness of employment certificates pertaining to the sureties. The contention raised by the petitioner that she needed only to certify the basic pay of the sureties is prima facie unacceptable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Annexure A9 would show that the entire liability has been paid off and nothing is now surviving. Considering the sequence of events and the materials on record, I find that this is not a fit case to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the charge against the petitioner as there are specific allegations against her which may require evidence for appreciation of her defence. However, the
Crl.M.C No.2118 of 2012 4
petitioner is free to raise appropriate plea for discharge before the trial court and in that event, the trial court shall consider the
same in accordance with law. I find no reason to quash the final report against the petitioner.
In the result, Crl.M.C is dismissed.
All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed.
Sd/A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
amk
//True Copy//
P.A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this is a fit case to invoke jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge against the petitioner involving allegations of cheque forgery.
Whether the petitioner, who attested employment certificates, is liable for cheating the respondent by allowing false details on said certificates.
Sarojini Amma
State of Kerala
The Manager, Kerala State Financial Enterprises
A.Hariprasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
