This bail application for anticipated arrest under Sections 465, 468, and 471 of the IPC regarding alleged forgery of death certificates was allowed. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender and court appearance.
Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender, appearance, non-interference conditions, and a bond of Rs.50,000.
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 VIJU ABRAHAM
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 1434 OF 2022
CRIME NO.277/2021 OF THRITHALA POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT
PETITIONERS:
1 MANIKANDAN AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. KESHAVAN NAIR, AALUVEETIL (H), AALOOR,PATTITHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534
2 VIJAYAKUMARI @ RADHIKA AGED 46 YEARS, W/O. MANIKANDAN, AALUVEETIL (H), AALOOR, PATTITHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534 BY ADVS. K.B.ARUNKUMAR POOJA K.S.
RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV.
SMT.SEETHA.S – SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA. No.1434/2022
..2..
O R D E R
Dated this the 08th day of August, 2022
This is an application for Anticipatory Bail.
The 1st petitioner is running a Computer Centre and as part of
BA. No.1434/2022
..3..
the job, 1st petitioner used to process various applications online of the customers coming to the Computer Centre. Even accepting the case of the prosecution, the 1st petitioner has already processed the online applications of the accused based on the documents produced by them and that the petitioners has not forged any documents as alleged. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no other criminal antecedents.
case and considering the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to
BA. No.1434/2022
..4..
stringent conditions. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer on 16.08.2022, at 11 am and shall make themselves available for interrogation on any other day/days as directed by the investigating officer in the event of arrest of the petitioners in Crime No.277/2021 of Thrithala Police Station, Palakkad District, the petitioners shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate and shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court ;
(ii) Petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.277/2021 of Thrithala Police Station, Palakkad District as and when summoned to do so;
(iii) Petitioners shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or
BA. No.1434/2022
..5..
intimidate any witness in Crime No.277/2021
of Thrithala Police Station, Palakkad District; (iv) Petitioners shall not involve in any other
crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.277/2021 of Thrithala Police Station, Palakkad District may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioners, even when the petitioners are on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State(NCT of Delhi) and another(2020(1)KHC 663).
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE
ded/08.08.2022
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners accused of forgery-related offences.
What conditions must be imposed while granting anticipatory bail in this case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State(NCT of Delhi) and anotherReferred¶44
Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State(NCT of Delhi) and another(2020(1)KHC 663)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MANIKANDAN
VIJAYAKUMARI @ RADHIKA
THE STATE OF KERALA
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER THRITHALA
VIJU ABRAHAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
