C.K.Vijayan vs State Of Kerala

Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.330/2021 of Hill Palace Police Station, Ernakulam District.

The offences alleged are under Sections 468, 471, 420 and 120B r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioners 2 and 3 and the de facto complainant are Directors of a company engaged in a hotel business. There are disputes existing between them. The allegation in this case is that the petitioners forged the digital signature of the de facto complainant and misused it.

I have heard Sri.John.S.Ralph, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Philip.T.Varghese, the learned counsel for the de facto complainant/the 2nd respondent and Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

As stated already, the prosecution case is that, the petitioners forged the digital signature of the de facto complainant and misused it. Admittedly, the alleged occurrence of the offence was in the year 2019. The crime was registered after two years. The records would show that already search was conducted in the office premises and some documents including the digital documents were seized.

This Court, as per order dated 7th March, 2022, passed an interim order whereby the petitioners were directed to appear before the Investigating Officer continuously for four days from 9.3.2022 to 12.3.2022 for interrogation. The petitioners were also directed to co-operate with the interrogation.

It is submitted by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor that in compliance of the said order, the petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer and they were interrogated. However, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that, what was uploaded at the GST Office was the copy of the document containing the alleged forged signature. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor submits that the original of the document containing the forged signature is to be traced out and seized. For the said purpose, the investigation should go on, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. However, I am of the view that, for the said limited purpose, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary, provided the petitioners co-operate with the investigation.

Considering all these aspects, I feel that it is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be granted to the petitioners on conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Saturday until further orders. The petitioners shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioners shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioners shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.