IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JULY, 2008 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3232 of 2005 (D) (CC.341/2004 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4: ----------------------------------- SULAIMAN, S/O.IMBICHI MUHAMMAD, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARECODE POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No. 3232 of 2005 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 2008 O R D E R This petition is filed by the fourth accused in C.C.No.341 of 2004 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri. The above case is instituted upon a final report filed by the Police after investigation in Crime No.336 of 1999 of the Areacode Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 465,468,472 read with Sec.34 I.P.C. 2. The above crime was registered in the Areacode Police Station on the basis of the F.I.R. received from the Valancherry Police Station in Crime No.203 of 1999. In Valancherry Police Station, as a part of the enquiry regarding the unauthorised collection of money from local people, the Police had occasion to question one Muneer @ Jayarajan. During his questioning, a blank cover was obtained and on examination, among other things, they seized stamp paper worth Rs.20/- which contained the seal impressions of Headmaster of Govt.U.P.School, CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-2-: Vettilampara and the school itself and the stamp paper contained a school certificate in the name of Sri.Abdul Muneer.T.T., S/o.Kammukkutty (father), Kooli, Kavanoor and on further questioning regarding the school certificate, the said Muneer @ Jayarajan disclosed to the Valanchery Police that the said Muneer for the purpose of obtaining driving licence met one Ummer, Malabar Driving School, Areacode and as suggested by the said Ummer, he had gone to Kulathingal Travels conducted by Sulaiman, the petitioner herein and the said Muneer informed the travel agency that he was coming as directed by the said Ummer and he requested him to give a school certificate as he had adopted Islam religion recently and hence, the attempt was to establish a proper and correct address. The said Muneer had further stated that he was asked to bring stamp paper worth Rs.20/- and he was told to come in the evening for obtaining the school certificate and accordingly, when he went to the travel agency in the evening, he was given certificate upon the stamp paper which he had CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-3-: entrusted with them. The certificate was given by a person by name Checkukakka and the said Muneer has paid Rs.250/- as the charge for preparing the school certificate. He had also made a confession statement. The same was recorded by the Valancherry Police. Apart from the above seizure, the travel agency, alleged to have been conducted by the petitioner herein, had been searched by the Police and during such search, the Police claimed that they have recovered the seals of Government Upper Primary School, Vettilappara and also the Headmaster of that school, stamp paper etc. Thus, accordingly, Crime No.203 of 1999 was registered in the Valancherry Police Station. Subsequently, the crime was transferred to the Areacode Police Station where Crime No.336 of 1999 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 472 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. After investigation of the above crime, the Areacode Police filed a final report on the basis of which the court took cognizance and instituted C.C.No.341 of 2004 for the above offences. It is the CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-4-: above Police report sought to be quashed in these proceedings. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no recovery from the possession of the petitioner and there is no allegation or averment to the effect that the forged document was created by the petitioner. It is also argued that the Police has no case that the school certificate alleged to have kept was used or produced before any authority or the same was used for committing any fraud and according to the counsel, as such keeping a false document in possession is not at all an offence punishable under Section 465 of I.P.C. It is also the case of counsel for the petitioner that Section 468 is not at all attracted as there is no allegation that the first accused committed any forgery for the purpose of cheating. Inviting my attention to Section 472 I.P.C., the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that none of the counterfeit seals or any other incriminating CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-5-: materials were seized from the possession of the petitioner. It is also submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the investigating agency could not recover any materials which is capable to connect the petitioner with the travel agency and still a charge has been laid even against the petitioner and the same was done only to harass the petitioner. According to counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is a school teacher having good reputation and if he is asked to face trial, it will amount to harassment and injustice to the petitioner. 5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor submits that several valuable materials were seized from the possession of the first accused and also from the travel agency alleged to have conducted by the petitioner. It is also the case of the Public Prosecutor that the first accused had made a confession statement connecting the petitioner with the alleged incident. However, I am not prepared to enter into any finding on merit regarding those allegations. Going by the CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-6-: materials available on record and considering the rival contentions advanced, I am of the view that the contentions raised by the petitioner are to be raised before the court below during the trial and in a proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., especially in the given facts and circumstances of the case, it is not proper to come into a conclusion as to whether the materials and allegations against the petitioner are sufficient to constitute the offences. In the light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in the case and considering the larger interest of justice, it is better to leave the questions for the proper adjudication by the trial court itself. Therefore, the Crl.M.C. is devoid of merit and it deserves to be dismissed and accordingly, the same is dismissed. V.K.Mohanan, Judge MBS/ CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-7-: V.K.MOHANAN, J. -------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.NO. OF 200 ------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-8-: O R D E R DATED: 7-2008 CRL.M.C. NO.3232 OF 2005 :-9-: