High CourtsSingle Bench

Sandhya vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 25 April 2023 · Citation: (2023) 04 KL CK 0172

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.G. Ajithkumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420, 465, 468, 471
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3092 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 338 words

P.G. Ajithkumar, J.

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.246 of 2023 of Arthungal Police Station. The offences alleged is under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The allegations based on which the Crime was registered are the petitioner who is the proprietor of a concern name ‘Habitat Constructions’ falsely affixed the signature of the defacto complainant and her designation seal in the papers submitted before the Cherthala Panchayath for obtaining building permit. Thereby the petitioners committed the aforementioned offences.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been engaging the defacto complainant for certifying building plans and application for permit to be submitted before the Local Self Government for the last several years and now she filed a complaint before the police without any reason. Further, the allegations levelled against the petitioner would not amount to the criminal offences as alleged.

6.

The facts constituting the allegations levelled against the petitioner who is a woman are borne by records. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the furtherance of the investigation. The petitioner and the defacto complainant are persons known to each other and therefore there is no question of any mistaken identity also.

Taking into account all such matters, the application is disposed of directing the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within a period of one week from today. In the event of his surrendering before the investigating officer, she shall, after interrogation and necessary other formalities of investigation, be produced before the Magistrate having jurisdiction within the time specified in Section 57 of the Code. If any bail application is filed by the petitioner, on such production, the learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same, as far as possible, on the same day.