IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2010 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7809 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1211/2009 OF VAIKOM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ------------------------------------------- GIJIMON.K.P, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.PADMANABHAN, KIDANGOOR HOUSE, KUDAVECHOOR, VECHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.THAMPI (SENIOR) SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7809 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner Gijimon.K.P., is the accused in Crime No.1211 of 2009 of Vaikom Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioner applied for getting admission to the course called Level III in Health and Social Care in London Thames college in UK. The basic qualification for getting admission to the course is General Nursing Certificate with four years experience. It is also necessary for the applicant to prove that he has a Bank deposit of Rs.6 lakhs and above. 4. The petitioner states that he is an MBA graduate. It is stated that he hails from a poor family. He claims that he had worked in Dubai and also in South Korea. He had also worked as an accountant in Taj Hotel on temporary basis before going to Dubai, submits the counsel. The petitioner claims that he very BA No.7809/2009 2 much longed for getting admission in London Thames college and therefore, he had made the application through an agency at Kottayam. As stated earlier, one of the conditions necessary for getting admission is the proof that the applicant has a deposit of Rs.6 lakhs and above. The petitioner produced a certificate allegedly issued by the State Bank of India, Ullala branch, Vaikom showing that he has a deposit of Rs.6,51,024/-. The application had to be submitted directly and personally to the visa centre of British High Commission at Ernakulam. The petitioner submitted the application and supporting documents. The visa centre forwarded the papers to the office of the Deputy British High Commission at Chennai. From there, an intimation was sent to the State Bank of India, Ullala branch for the purpose of verifying the correctness of the certificate allegedly issued by the State Bank of India. The State Bank of India replied stating that the certificate produced by the petitioner is a forged document. The Manager of the State Bank of India filed a petition before the police. Accordingly, the crime was registered. During investigation, it was revealed that even the certificates produced by the petitioner to show his qualification and experience in nursing are all manipulated and forged BA No.7809/2009 3 documents. He had produced a certificate as if it was issued to him, while at the foot of the certificate, the name of a girl is shown. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that it would appear that the certificate was really issued to that girl and the name of the petitioner was forged and entered in that certificate to make it appear that it was issued to him. 5. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are grave in nature. It not only affects his chance of getting admission in the London Thames college, but it affects the prestige of an ordinary Indian when a fellow citizen submits a forged document before the British High Commission. I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to any discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Custodial interrogation is necessary in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl