IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 4167 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRMP.4095/2010 of J.M.F.C.-II, KOLLAM .................... (CRIME NO.779/2010 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM) PETITIONER/ACCUSED. --------------------------------------- SUBAIRKUTTY, SON OF USMAN KUNJU, AGED 55 YEARS, USMANIA VEETTIL, NEW NAGAR 79, MANAVUAD CHERRY, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RRESPONDENTS/STATE. ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No.4167 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 464, 465, 471 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, Transport Commissioner preferred a complaint to the I.G of police stating that certain Ophthalmologist certificates produced for obtaining driving licence were forged. I.G of police, in turn, forwarded the complaint to the Superintendent of Police. Superintendent of Police directed the Dy.SP, Crime Branch to conduct an investigation in the matter. 3. IG of police had conducted an enquiry and found that about 15 driving licences were produced before the office of the RTO and one of such driving licence was produced by petitioner. Along with the application for driving licence, ophthalmologist report was produced in respect of a person who had learned driving through the driving school of petitioner. Therefore, a crime was registered against petitioner. Petitioner was arrested. On investigation, it was revealed that petitioner along with his brother-in-law and another person (A2 and A3) had forged ophthalmologist certificate for the purpose of obtaining the driving licence. B.A. No.4167 of 2010 2 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. It is submitted that owner of another driving school was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court though some similar allegations are made against him also. Petitioner is in custody for the past 15 days. Investigation is almost completed, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the matter is being investigated into. Second and third accused are not so far arrested to find out the manner in which the certificates are forged. Their arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary. At this stage, if petitioner is granted bail, it will adversely affect the investigation, it is submitted. It is also pointed out that anticipatory bail was not granted to any co-accused in this case. The anticipatory bail order which was referred to by petitioner is issued in favour of another accused, in another crime and the reason shown was “as of now, there is nothing to implicate the petitioner in the crime”. It cannot be made a ground to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner in this case. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the documents produced and considering the serious nature of the B.A. No.4167 of 2010 3 allegations made, the nature of investigation required in this case and the fact that the co-accused are not so far arrested, I am satisfied that if bail is granted to petitioner at this stage, it is likely that the investigation will be affected adversely. It is true that anticipatory bail was granted to another accused by the Sessions Court. But, in that case, the case diary did not reveal anything against petitioner. That cannot be made a reason to release petitioner on bail. Petitioner was arrested and materials are obtained in the investigation. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE vdv