IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2008 / 14TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7609 of 2007(H) ------------------------------ CRIME NO.267/2007 OF THE MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION : PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- HASSAN KUNHI, S/O.MOHAMMED, BACHILAKA HOUSE, KUNJATHOOR P.O., MANJESHWAR. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SHO MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.7609 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable under Section 468 I.P.C and Section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he, along with his passport applications, had produced a forged admission register extract from a school. He was not a student of that school. He had never studied in that school. According to the prosecution, that forged extracts were produced obviously to mislead the authorities. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. There is no contention raised before me that the document produced is not a forged one. The only contention urged is that the petitioner had entrusted the matter with his travel agent and it is he who had produced all the documents before the authorities. The petitioner is innocent. There is no purpose served for him for producing such false certificates, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. B.A.No.7609/07 2 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is in progress. The petitioner is the one who had produced the forged certificates before the authorities. Further investigation has to be conducted to ascertain whether any other person is also responsible for the forgery and whether the petitioner's defence that he is innocent can be accepted. At any rate, it is not necessary at this stage to permit the petitioner to arm himself with an order of anticipatory bail. The petitioner may be directed to appear before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied that there are no features in this case which would justify invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must appear before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and ordinary course. B.A.No.7609/07 3 5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge B.A.No.7609/07 4 B.A.No.7609/07 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007