Sri Dinni Latheef vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

This anticipatory bail application filed on 11.11.2022 is at the instance of the first accused in crime No.1008/2022 of Kollam East Police Station.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

I have perused the relevant documents form part of the case diary placed by the learned Public Prosecutor in this matter.

The prosecution case is that accused Nos. 1 and 2, being the Chief Cashiers of Kollam Corporation, released Fixed Deposits for an amount of Rs.3,28,500/- (Rupees three lakh twenty eight thousand and five hundred only) to accused Nos.3 to 5, who are contractors, after forging the releasing notices with forged signature of the Superintending Engineer of Kollam Corporation and also fake designation seal and fake official seal of Kollam Corporation. On production of the forged documents, accused No.3 withdrew an amount of Rs.7,000/-and accused No.4 released a total amount of Rs.2,10,000/-. The total sum of Rs.3,28,000/- was so released. The allegation in details runs on the premise that accused No.4 released an amount of Rs.26,000/-, Rs.29,000/- Rs.40,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.75,000/- by using the forged releasing notices produced by the first accused before the District Treasury office, Kollam. Based on the above facts, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Therefore, he may be released on anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that as per interim order issued by another learned Single Judge of this Court, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer on 01.12.2022 and 09.12.2022, and subjected himself for interrogation. Therefore, there is no necessity for custodial interrogation of the petitioner and accordingly, he deserves anticipatory bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner herein cannot be released on anticipatory bail since investigation regarding the forged documents created by the first accused by forging the signature of the Superintending Engineer and fake seals of the office and the Superintending Engineer are matters which would require detailed investigation to elicit the manner in which forgery was committed. It is also submitted that even though the petitioner herein appeared before the Investigating Officer, as directed by this Court earlier, the petitioner did not co-operate with the investigation and he not even given true answers to facilitate the investigation. Therefore, anticipatory bail plea at the instance of the petitioner deserves dismissal since arrest and custodial interrogation of the petitioner are essential part of investigation.

On going through the pages of the relevant records of the case diary, the allegations against the petitioner are very serious. The specific case is that the petitioner herein, being the cashier of Kollam Corporation, released Fixed Deposits for an amount of Rs.3,28,500/- (Rupees three lakh twenty eight thousand and five hundred only) to accused Nos.3 to 5, who are contractors, after forging the Releasing Notices with forged signature of the Superintending Engineer of Kollam Corporation and fake designation seal and fake official seal of Kollam Corporation. On production of the forged documents, accused No.3 withdrew an amount of Rs.7,000/-and accused No.4 released a total amount of Rs.2,10,000/-. The total sum of Rs.3,28,000/- was so released. The allegation in details runs on the premise that accused No.4 released an amount of Rs.26,000/-, Rs.29,000/- Rs.40,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.75,000/- by using the forged releasing notices produced by the first accused before the District Treasury office, Kollam.

It is shocking to note further that, even though this Court directed the petitioner herein to subject himself for interrogation for two days, the Investigating Officer filed specific report stating that the petitioner did not co-operate with the investigation and he had not given answers to the reasonable questions asked in connection with the investigation, regarding the custody of the Security Deposit receipts and handing over of charge of the Chief Cashier of Kollam Corporation by his predecessor - the second accused in this crime, etc.

In this matter, very serious offence of forgery alleged to be committed by the Chief Cashier of Kollam Corporation is the crux, for which arrest, custodial interrogation and collection of evidence regarding the manner in which forgery was committed, are essential part of investigation and in such a case, the prime accused/the petitioner herein, if released on anticipatory bail, the same not only would hamper the investigation but the same also akin to honourable acquittal of the petitioner during investigation. Therefore, this petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

In the result, this bail application stands dismissed.