Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Sri.P.Vijaya Bhanu on 26 May, 2016
Author: P.Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2016/5TH JYAISHTA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 3049 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 320/2013 OF CRIME BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
-------------------
APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.11:
--------------------------------------------------
P.F.LORENCE, AGED 49 YEARS,
COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR,
COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK-POST,
VALARA.
BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU,SENIOR ADVOCATE
ADVS. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN
SMT.MITHA SUDHINDRAN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.RASHEED
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 26-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
P.UBAID, J.
============================
B.A.No.3049 of 2016
============================
Dated this the 26th day of May, 2016
ORDER
The petitioner seeks pre arrest bail on the apprehension of arrest in Crime No.320 of 2013 of the Crime Branch, Palakkad. The petitioner happened to be implicated, and arraigned as accused while he was working in the Sale Tax Check Post, Neduppunni. The facts and allegations need not be explained in so many words. In brief, the allegation is that in violation of a Government Order that cash shall not be received towards sales tax amounts the petitioner received either cheques or Demand Drafts. The cheques so received happened to be bounced, and the Demand Drafts were found to be forged, later. Then came a prosecution against the Sales Tax Officer. The very short question is whether any of the accused was in any manner benefited by the alleged act. I find that what is B.A.No.3049 of 2016 2 prominently alleged is only violation of the Government Order. Even the Demand Drafts received in compliance of the Government Circular were found to be forged. Thus ultimately the State lost a huge amount of Rs.13 Crores. It is submitted that proceedings are now going on to recover the amount of tax from the various persons who submitted false Demand Drafts or cheques. This petitioner is being prosecuted under Section 420 IPC on the allegation that they cheated the Government. The State must fairly concede that this petitioner is not in fact liable under Section 420 IPC. Admittedly, none of the accused was in any manner benefited by the alleged crime. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary as part of investigation in this crime. The Investigating Officer has already seized the relevant documents including the questioned cheques and Demand Drafts. Interrogation of the petitioner in custody is not necessary, because even otherwise necessary materials have already been collected. I find B.A.No.3049 of 2016 3 that this petitioner can be granted pre arrest bail.
In the result, this application is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond with two solvent sureties for 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction, as the case may be, in case of their arrest in connection with Crime No.320 of 2013 of the Crime Branch, Palakkad. Bail is granted on condition that;
a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when required by him for the purpose of interrogation as part of investigation, and that the petitioner shall not in any manner obstruct the investigation or tamper with any of the documents or registers involved in the case.
Sd/-
rkj P.UBAID, JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE