Kerala High Court
Jaleel vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2009
Author: K.T.Sankaran
Bench: K.T.Sankaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 3919 of 2009()
1. JALEEL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :04/08/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
B.A. NO. 3919 OF 2009
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th August, 2009
O R D E R
This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.190 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 255, 260 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The Assistant Superintendent of Post Office, Kasaragod submitted a petition to the Sub Inspector of Police, Kasaragod stating that out of the 73 articles presented by the Regional Transport Officer, Kasaragod for booking as speed post articles on 16.3.2009, four articles were found to bear postage stamps of the denomination of Rs.20/-, which were suspected to be fake. On the basis of this petition, a crime was registered. On investigation, it was revealed that the fake stamps were affixed on envelops B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 2 ::
submitted to the RTO for the purpose of sending driving licence to the addressees by post. For getting a driving licence, the applicant has to present a self addressed envelop with the required postage stamps to the RTO. It is alleged that the petitioner, who is running a driving school, has submitted these envelops on which fake postage stamps were seen affixed. The petitioner could not be arrested as he was absconding.
4. The petitioner filed an application for anticipatory bail before this Court as B.A.No.1699 of 2009, which was disposed of as per the order dated 3.4.2009. The petitioner was directed to surrender before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation on 13.4.2009. A direction was issued to the investigating officer to produce the petitioner on the same day before the Magistrate and the learned Magistrate was also directed to consider and dispose of the application for regular bail preferably on the same date. The petitioner did not surrender as directed. Later, he filed B.A.No.2364 of 2009 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That application was dismissed by me on 28.5.2009. Thereafter, the petitioner surrendered before Court on 8.6.2009 and he was remanded to judicial custody.
B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 3 ::
5. Grave offences have been alleged against the petitioner.
Counterfeiting government stamps is a very serious offence. It is punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for the term which may extend to ten years and with fine. The investigating agency filed an application before the learned Magistrate for getting custody of the petitioner for interrogation. When the petitioner was produced before Court on 11.6.2009, he stated before Court that he was not physically and mentally fit. The learned Magistrate directed the petitioner to be subjected to examination by the Superintendent of General Hospital, Kasaragod. The Superintendent of the General Hospital issued a certificate stating that the accused was physically and mentally fit. It is stated that thereafter, the petitioner was interrogated by the investigating officer.
6. According to the prosecution, one fake stamp was seized on a search conducted in the house of the petitioner. The envelops containing fake stamps were seen forwarded to the India Security Press through messenger. The covers were received by the India Security Press only on 25.6.2009. It would appear that the envelops containing fake stamps were sent to the India Security Press only B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 4 ::
during last week of June, 2009. The examination of the stamps could not be conducted by the India Security Press as they demanded a sum of Rs.1,800/- as the examination fee. It is stated that a charge of Rs.100/- is to be paid for examination of each document. The Assistant Sub Inspector of Police and the police constable who went from Kerala to the India Security Press came back. They could not pay Rs.1,800/- at the India Security Press.
7. As stated earlier, the petitioner is running a driving school. On 19.3.2009, search was conducted in the driving school. It is stated that computer, scanner, printer etc. were seized from the driving school. These articles were sent to the C-DAC for examination and verification. Learned Public Prosecutor states that the report from C-DAC is not received so far.
8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Section 255 was sought to be added only to see that the petitioner is not granted bail. He also submitted that the court must take serious note of such steps on the part of the investigating agency as the freedom of the citizen is the most important aspect. If Section 255 was added originally, anybody could say that the investigating B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 5 ::
agency was wrong. Even if a person produces an article on which a fake or counterfeit stamp is affixed, it cannot be assumed that he has done the counterfeiting. That was why, probably, Section 260 was shown as the Section under which the offence was committed. Later, the investigating agency came to the conclusion that the petitioner himself is the person who has counterfeited the stamps and accordingly, Section 255 was added.
9. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 8.6.2009. He filed Bail Application No.3609 of 2009, which was dismissed by me by the order dated 3rd July, 2009.
10. The petitioner has approached this Court again for grant of bail. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the delay in getting the report from the India Security Press or C-DAC is not a reason for detaining the petitioner further.
11. In the letter dated 25.6.2009 from the General Manager, India Security Press, Nasik to the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kasaragod, a request was made to remit Rs.1,800/- as the "Examination fee". It is stated therein that the India Security Press B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 6 ::
charges Rs.100/- per document as examination fee.
12. The learned Public Prosecutor, on telephonic instruction, submitted that the investigating officer has requested the Superintendent of Police, Kasaragod for sanctioning Rs.1,800/- for the aforesaid purpose. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the District Superintendent of Police would be able to sanction only up to a sum of Rs.500/-. Amounts above Rs.500/-
shall be sanctioned by the Inspector General of Police, Northern Range.
13. In a serious case like this, the examination of stamps by the India Security Press could not be made for want of sanction of Rs.1,800/-. This shows a sorry state of affairs. The police officers who went to India Security Press could not get the report since they were not authorised to deposit Rs.1,800/-. They came back to Kerala. Even now, the problem is not solved and the amount is not deposited. The result is that the report of the India Security Press is not obtained. Without getting the report, it may not be possible for the investigating officer to complete the investigation. B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 7 ::
14. The offenders are equipped with sophisticated equipments and gadgets for perpetrating the offence. The magnitude of the offence in the present case cannot be underestimated. Counterfeiting postage stamps and wide user of such stamps would have the effect of running a parallel postage system. Such offences are to be checked and the counterfeiters' network curbed. The investigating agencies should take special care in such cases affecting the national economy and deal with the same with promptitude. Inability to deposit Rs.1,800/- has now seriously affected the expeditious investigation of the case. The Government of Kerala would have to solve problems like the one in the present case and equip the investigating officers to act promptly and quickly. The investigating agencies must have sufficient financial resources to meet the contingencies in the process of investigation of crimes, especially crimes affecting the nation and its economy.
15. The Bail Application filed by the petitioner on the earlier occasion was dismissed on the ground that there was every likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence or intimidating or influencing the witnesses. There is no change of circumstances in the case. The sequence of events in the case B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 8 ::
would show that the petitioner did not co-operate with the investigating officer. The petitioner did not even comply with the direction issued by this Court.
16. The antecedents of the petitioner are also relevant. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.130 of 2005 of Badiadka Police Station in which the petitioner is alleged to have committed forgery of driving license. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases as well.
17. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is a powerful person of the locality and he is highly influential. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the smooth and proper investigation of the case. I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be granted bail at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.
The District Superintendent of Police shall supervise the investigation of the case to ensure prompt and speedy investigation. B.A. NO.3919 OF 2009 :: 9 ::
The Registry shall communicate a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Kerala.
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/