Ummerkutty vs State Of Kerala

Shircy V, J

The petitioner, who is arraigned as the 1st accused in Crime No.1611 of 2021 of Kannur Town Police station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, has preferred this application for his release on bail.

The petitioner has been in custody since 26.11.2021.

The FIR as well the connected documents in this case would reveal that the 2nd accused had forged a document, for the purpose of cheating, as if it is a decree of the President of India, declaring that Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994 is void as the Act was passed without the concurrence of Council of Ministers. This document was produced by the petitioner as genuine knowing that it is a forged one before the Secretary of Kannur Corporation, from where a notice was issued to him in connection with certain disputes pending between him and his partners with respect to a building situated in the Kannur Corporation by name 'Shenoys' complex. The said forged document was also produced before the office of the Regional Fire Officer, Kannur who is entrusted with safety verification of the buildings. This forged document was created and produced by the accused for the purpose of cheating the officials and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

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

This petitioner is aged 67 years. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a cardiac patient who is undergoing treatment before a Cardiologist at Thalassery. It is also submitted that bail has already been granted to the 2nd accused as per an order dated 12.11.2021.

On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed this application for bail as the crux of the charge is on the basis of a document created fraudulently in the name of the President of India. The accusation levelled against the petitioner and the other accused is very serious in nature as a document was created as if it was issued by the President of India on the complaint submitted by this petitioner. The said document was produced before the Corporation, Kozhikode and before the Regional Fire Officer, Fire and Rescue Services, Kannur as a genuine one to secure favorable orders from the authorities. So the malafide intention and ulterior motive is patent and hence, the application is opposed.

Heard the rival contentions and perused the records.

The facts narrated in the above records indicate that the document was created by the accused as if it is a decree obtained by the petitioner from the President of India on the complaint submitted by him. The said document was produced by him before the Secretary, Municipal Corporation, Kannur and the Regional Fire Officer, Fire and Rescue Services, Kannur, as if he obtained it on his complaint before the President of India and attempted satisfy the authorities that he had sufficient cause for securing such an order. The crux of the charge is that the petitioner was also having the intention to accept the same as a genuine document for the decision making process in the dispute pending between his partners, regarding the construction of a building. It cannot be treated as a format, as it has been drafted cautiously and deliberately. So, no doubt, the gravity of the offences committed by the accused are grave and serious in nature and now the investigation of the case is only at the preliminary stage. Since the forged document was produced before the authorities where dispute was pending between partners of a business, prima facie, the intention to deceive the officials as well the business partners is evident and no doubt it affects the interests of the society also.

In short, prima facie, reasonable grounds are there to believe that the petitioner had committed the offence. So, definitely the investigation has to proceed with and the investigating agency has to collect more materials for which time is required. But here it is significant to note that the petitioner is aged 67 years and is suffering from various ailments including heart disease as pointed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

For the reasons stated above, I think that he can be released on bail imposing reasonable restrictions and conditions.

Therefore, this application is allowed subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. (One surety shall be a close relative)

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing, till filing of the final report.

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the court concerned. If he is not having a passport, he shall file an affidavit regarding the same before the court, within a week of his release on bail.

(iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

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

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the Jurisdictional Court

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the Jurisdictional Court is at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.