IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5927 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.89/2009 OF THIDANADU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ K.C.ANTONY, KAITHAKEL HOUSE, CHEMMALAMATTOM P.O., KONDOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.BABY THOMAS SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THIDANADU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5927 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.89 of 2009 of Thidanadu Police Station, Kottayam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 511 of 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: Accused No.1, K.C.Antony and accused No.2, Jacqueline Antony, Wife of K.C.Antony, approached the Axis Bank, Pala for a loan of Rs.25 lakhs. They offered to furnish security of the property belonging to Jacqueline Antony. Along with the application, the accused persons produced Land Tax Receipt, certificate dated 13.7.2009 issued by the Village Officer, Kondoor, possession certificate dated 30.6.2009 issued by the Village Officer, Kondoor and location sketch dated 30.6.2009 issued by the Village Officer, Kondoor. The Branch Head of Pala Branch of the Axis Bank BA No.5927/2009 2 requested the Village Officer to verify the genuineness of the aforesaid four documents. The Village Officer found that those documents were forged and that the signature and seal contained in those documents were also forged. On 24.7.2009, the Village Officer submitted a petition to the Circle Inspector of Police, Erattupetta mentioning about the forgery of the documents. The FIR was registered accordingly for the offences mentioned above showing Antony and his wife Jacqueline Antony as the accused persons. 4. Jacqueline Antony filed an application for anticipatory bail before this Court as Bail Application No.4695 of 2009. In that case, a direction was issued to her to appear before the investigating officer. She appeared before the investigating officer. Later, anticipatory bail was granted as per the order dated 5th October 2009. 5. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the crime and he apprehends harassment and humiliation by the police. Sri.Ramakumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that custodial interrogation is not necessary in the present case. It is submitted that the new generation BA No.5927/2009 3 Banks grant loans very liberally. In fact, it is alleged that they even canvass customers for opening accounts and for taking loan. It is contended that the petitioner and his wife were approached by the officials of the Axis Bank with offer to grant loans and on further condition that they should be paid commission for the same. They only wanted the petitioner to provide the title deed of the property. The assurance was that the other certificates like possession certificate etc. would be procured by them. Accordingly, the certificates were procured by them from the Village Office. The petitioner and his wife are not responsible for the same. It is submitted that the petitioner and his wife are made scape-goats in the case. 6. Sri.Ramakumar further submitted that the wife of the petitioner has disclosed all the facts to the investigating officer. The prosecution can prove the offence, if any, without any custodial interrogation. It is submitted that the petitioner will make himself available for questioning at any time. He is also prepared to provide specimen handwriting and signature to the investigating officer. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed BA No.5927/2009 4 the Bail Application. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in the case. It is to be ascertained as to how the petitioner could procure the forged documents and as to who else are involved in the offence. It is submitted that anticipatory bail was granted to the second accused Jacqueline Antony on an entirely different consideration including that she is a woman. It is pointed out that the present case is not a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 8. The offence alleged against the accused persons is very grave. Prima facie, the petitioner is responsible for production of documents to enable him to get the loan. The contention that the officials of the Bank are also involved is a matter for investigation. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case. As submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, the complicity of other persons, if any, is also to be found out. Forging documents and using the same as genuine as if those documents were issued by the Village Officer, cannot be viewed lightly. The matter requires thorough investigation. This is not a fit case where the discretion can be BA No.5927/2009 5 exercised to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The allegations levelled against the petitioner, the nature and gravity of the offence and the facts and circumstances of the case are such as would disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl