Kerala High Court
Murali vs State Of Kerala on 26 October, 2009
Author: K.T.Sankaran
Bench: K.T.Sankaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5944 of 2009()
1. MURALI , AGED 48 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. JOSHY @ THOMAS, AGED 46 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :26/10/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,
6046 AND 6234 OF 2009
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of October, 2009
O R D E R
These Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by some of the accused persons in Crime No.391 of 2009 of Varantharappilly Police Station. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 465, 471, 474, 475 and 476 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The number of the Bail Application, rank of the accused persons, names of the accused persons and date of their arrest are shown below:
B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 2 ::
Number of the Rank of the Name of the Date of arrest Bail accused accused Application B.A. 5944 of A11, A12 Murali 1-10-2009 2009 Joshi @ Thomas B.A. No. 5970 A7 Babu, son of 19-9-2009 of 2009 Ananthan B.A. No. 5998 A2 Babu, son of 18-9-2009 of 2009 Anthony B.A. No. 5999 A3, A4, A6, Vinodan 18-9-2009 of 2009 A9 Kamaludeen Raghunandanan Venugopal B.A. No. 6046 A8 Anil 18-9-2009 of 2009 B.A. No. 6234 A10 Lijo 19-9-2009 of 2009
3. The case of the prosecution is the following: On 17-9-2009, the Circle Inspector of Police, Pudukkad got secret information that forged driving licences are kept for sale by Rafi alias Kunhumon, the first accused, in the quarters at Chimmini Irrigation Dam. Search was conducted at the quarters. 20 driving licences, school certificates, electoral identity cards, photocopies of passports, passport size photographs of 29 persons, slips of papers showing B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 3 ::
the address of different persons and Rs. 12,000/- were seized. It was revealed that the driving licences and other documents were forged ones intended to be sold to the required persons. It was revealed that the forged driving licences were given by Babu, the second accused.
4. Investigation revealed that the other accused persons were also involved in the offences. The second accused is the person who supplied the forged and counterfeited driving licences to the first accused. The third accused made the driving licences at the residence of the 2nd accused. The fourth accused forged the signatures in the driving licences. Accused Nos.6 and 9 were engaged in the sale of forged driving licences. Accused No.7 counterfeited the seal of Regional Transport office. Accused No.8 is the canvassing agent. Accused No.10, a photographer, got the print outs. Accused Nos.11 and 12 are auto consultants on whose request, the counterfeiting and forgery took place. It is alleged that the accused persons acted as a team for commission of the offences.
5. Investigation revealed that forged driving licences were B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 4 ::
being given to the needy persons. In some cases, driving licences of Regional Transport Offices in other States were also forged and the change of address of the licence holder was effected by committing forgery. It is revealed that in the whole exercise, no application was submitted by any person in the Regional Transport Office, no fee was paid and the Regional Transport Office was never involved in the issue of licence or in effecting the change of address in the licence. In other words, the allegation is that the accused persons acted as if they were running a parallel Regional Transport Office. It is alleged that all the necessary documents and seals were manufactured, forged and counterfeited by the accused persons.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no material to connect the accused with the offence. It is submitted that they are innocent. They are in judicial custody for a long period and there is no reason why they should not be released on bail.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is not complete, particularly in respect of the Passports and school certificates. It is submitted that if the petitioners are B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 5 ::
released on bail at this stage, they would tamper with the evidence and indulge in activities to intimidate and influence the witnesses.
8. The offences alleged against the petitioners are very grave. It would appear that several persons resort to illegal methods to acquire driving licences. Persons who are ready to accomplish the demand of such people are available. The persons who acquire such forged driving licences and use the same as genuine ones as well as the persons who manufacture and arrange the same are guilty. It is very difficult to find out whether a driving licence is genuine or fake. If persons are allowed to indulge in such criminal activities, it would not only cause loss to the State but it would create two types of licence holders, namely, those who get the driving licence after paying the necessary fee and undergoing the required tests and those who do not do so. If offences of this nature become widespread, the losers would be State and the law abiding people. Persons indulging in such offences should be prosecuted with all seriousness. They should not be allowed to tamper with the evidence and intimidate or influence the witnesses.
9. I am not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioners B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 6 ::
that there are no materials to connect them with the offence. If the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor is without substance.
For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Applications are dismissed.
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge