Allowed

Rajesh Kumar P.S., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Dec 2021Bail Appl./6958/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, a consultant civil engineer accused of forgery and cheating. The court noted no criminal antecedents and lack of evidence showing the petitioner forged documents, directing surrender for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted; surrendered by 13.12.2021; bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with sureties; appear for interrogation.

Rajesh Kumar P.S., Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 6958 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.273/2021 OF Thodupuzha Police Station, Idukki AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 794/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

RAJESH KUMAR P.S., AGED 46 YEARS S/O. P.S. SOMAN, PURATHETTU HOUSE, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA.

¶9

BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN V.VINAY M.S.ANEER

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, CRIME NO. 273/2021 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, CRIME NO. 273/2021 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT). PP SRI. M.C. ASHI

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.6958/2021

ORDER

Dated this the 6^th day of December, 2021

¶17

Petitioner, who is the 2^nd accused in Crime No. 273 of 2021

¶18

of Thodupuzha Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, apprehending arrest has preferred this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶19

The prosecution case in brief is as follows:

¶20

This petitioner along with the 1^st accused presented a forged possession certificate in the name of the 1^st accused before the Municipality which pertains to the property in Sy. No. 54/1-4-11 of Thodupuzha Municipality and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Consultant Civil Engineer and running a firm by name 'Souparnika Designers' at Thodupuzha. He is engaged in

¶22

B.A.6958/2021

¶23

¶24

the work of preparation of plan for construction of buildings. The 1^st accused has approached him and entrusted with the work to construct a residential house for him. He has submitted certain documents including the possession certificate. This petitioner has presented all the documents submitted by the 1^st accused along with the draft plan for approval before the Municipality. But later it was learnt that the property in which the building was proposed to be constructed was mortgaged and there was some defect and hence sanction was not granted. That fact was informed to the 1^st accused. After some time, the 1^st accused again approached this petitioner and informed that mortgage had been cleared and the new possession certificate obtained by him from the authority had been handed over to him. So, this petitioner presented the said document also before the Municipal authorities. But this crime has been registered against him alleging that he along with the 1^st accused had forged the document and attempted to use the same as a genuine one so as to cheat the officials and thereby he has been implicated in the case. In fact, he is totally innocent of the

¶25

B.A.6958/2021

¶26

¶27

allegations levelled against him.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the application and contended that custodial interrogation of this petitioner is absolutely necessary to proceed with the investigation of the case as the records revealed that he along with the 1^st accused had forged the document and attempted to cheat the authorities so as to procure the permit for construction of the building.

¶29

Heard both sides.

¶30

From the records, it is seen that the petitioner is a B class Engineer doing construction work at Thodupuzha. The definite case of this petitioner is that all the documents entrusted to him by the 1^st accused have been presented by him before the Municipality and there are no materials as such to show that he has forged the document. But when the allegation is like that, definitely the investigating agency has to probe into the details. But it has to be noted that the 1^st accused had

¶31

B.A.6958/2021

¶32

¶33

already been arrested and released on bail and the investigation is well in progress. This petitioner has absolutely no criminal antecedents though he is running the firm for the last so many years. Considering the entire facts involved in this case, I think that pre-arrest bail can be granted to the petitioner.

¶34

Therefore, this application is disposed of directing the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer on 13.12.2021 at 10.30 a.m. Upon his surrender, after interrogation and recording arrest, he shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶35

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶36

(ii) The petitioner shall appear for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him in writing.

¶37

(iii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with

¶38

B.A.6958/2021

¶39

¶40

the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such

¶41

facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶42

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶43

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance

with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

Rajesh Kumar P.S., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar P.S., 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

Robin T.B. Vs State of Kerala

Jinshamol A.N Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Shafi. M., Vs State of Kerala

Sarath Vs State of Kerala

Usman Kunhi P.H Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hameed, Vs State of Kerala