IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1697 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.79/08 OF PERINGOME POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED: ------------------------- KABEER.N., S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 28, NANDARATH HOUSE, KOLLADA, CHERUPUZHA, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & FORMAL PARTY: ---------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERINGOME POLICE STATION, PERINGOME, KANNUR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No.1697 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.468 and 471 of the IPC. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner – a young man, badly wanted to get married. To enable him to get married, he was to obtain a no objection certificate from the local Mosque Committee. The Committee allegedly did not issue the certificate to him and demanded amounts to facilitate to issue of such certificate. The petitioner did not suffer from any disqualification to get married. The petitioner is alleged to have made up a certificate purporting to be the one issued by the Committee and made use of the same to get married. The marriage has already taken place. The indiscretion has come B.A. No.1697 of 2008 -: 2 :- to light. A crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations levelled against him. He is not responsible for the forgery. In any case, a lenient view may be taken and the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. Appropriate conditions may be imposed in the interests of a fair and efficient investigation, it is submitted. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am persuaded to agree that the directions under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. can be issued in favour of the petitioner. 5. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 1/4/08. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. B.A. No.1697 of 2008 -: 3 :- and 3 p.m. on 2/4/08 and 3/4/08 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all; (iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 1/4/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 1.4.08. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge