Kerala High Court
M.Muraleedharan vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 26 August, 2016
Author: P.Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/4TH BHADRA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 4671 of 2016
-----------------------------
CRIME NO. 1633/2015 OF PARASSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANDAPURAM
---------------
PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED:
----------------------
M.MURALEEDHARAN,
AGED 63 YEARS,
S/O. MADASAMY, KRISHNAPURI, NEDUVANVILA,
PARASSALA, THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT.STATE:
-----------------------------
1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
PARASSALA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- DISTRICT-695 502
2. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN-682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI ROY THOMAS
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
K.V.
P.UBAID, J.
============================
B.A.No.4671 of 2016
============================
Dated this the 26th day of August, 2016
ORDER
The petitioner herein seeks pre arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest in connection with Crime No.1633 of 2015 of the Parassala Police Station, registered under Sections 463, 464, 466, 468, 471, 420 and 120 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He is the fifth accused in the crime.
2. There is report that the accused Nos.1 to 4 are already on regular bail. Forgery of a document alleged to have been executed by the petitioner herein is the subject matter of this crime. The petitioner is definite that it was executed by him as the owner of the land, and that there is no question of any forgery in the execution of such a document. It is not exactly known what is the forgery really B.A.No.4671 of 2016 2 alleged by the prosecution as against this petitioner. In the nature of the allegations, I feel it appropriate to direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation. After interrogation, appropriate decision on the request for bail shall be taken by the learned Magistrate on a consideration of all the aspects including the defence projected by the petitioner herein, and also the fact that the other accused against whom prominent allegations are made, are on regular bail. Interrogation of the petitioner for the collection of materials concerning the exact nature of the alleged forgery, whether the petitioner executed the document is his capacity as owner of the land, etc; is necessary.
In the result, this application for bail is disposed of as follows;
a) The petitioner will surrender before the investigating officer between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. on any day within ten days from this date for the purpose of interrogation as part of investigation. B.A.No.4671 of 2016 3
b) After necessary interrogation, the investigating officer will produce the petitioner before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction before 4 p.m. on the same day.
c) In case application for regular bail is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be judiciously considered and decided on the same day by the learned Magistrate.
Sd/-
P.UBAID,JUDGE rkj //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE