IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2009 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4595 of 2008(D) ------------------------- CRIME NO.698/2008 OF CHERTHALA POLICE STATION. PETITIONER(S): IST ACCUSED -------------------------- P.S.SURESH KUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAN, KULATHARAKATH HOUSE, CMC IX, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. (SECRETARY, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO.1688, CHERTHALA). BY ADV. SRI.P.G.THAMPI (SENIOR) SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI SRI.V.GOPIKRISHNA RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, EASTERN RANGE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERTHALA. R1 - R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVEENDRA BABU. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dkr M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No.4595 of 2008-D ================== Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the first accused in Crime No.698/2008 being investigated by Cherthala Police for the offences under Sections 409, 468, 471, 120B and 293 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The case of the petitioner is that he is in no way connected with the offences and infact he is the first informant, based on which the misappropriation was detected and the Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau had originally investigated the case and submitted a report to the effect that petitioner is not involved, but subsequently, the Director of Vigilance submitted a report to the Additional Chief Secretary stating that the case is to be investigated by the local police and based on which further investigation was entrusted with Cherthala Police. It is the case of the petitioner that while the case was registered by Cherthala police, under Annexure A6 FIR petitioner was Crl.M.C.No.4595/2008-D -2- implicated as sixth accused and being the first informant, who has to aid the prosecution, has now become the accused and it is an abuse of process of court and therefore it is to be quashed. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the information furnished by the petitioner was not the truth and instead was suppressing true facts and subsequently it was found out that there was misappropriation to the tune of Rs.1,32,958/- and it is also found out that petitioner is also involved and the case is being investigated and in such circumstances, the FIR as against the petitioner cannot be quashed. 3. As per order dated 27-11-2008 this court recorded the undertaking of the Public Prosecutor that petitioner will not be arrested. Subsequently, as per order dated 16- 1-2009, a direction was given not to arrest the accused until further orders. 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently argued that petitioner cannot be the first accused in the case and that too, in a case detected Crl.M.C.No.4595/2008-D -3- based on the information furnished by the petitioner and therefore the inclusion of the petitioner as first accused is malafide and is to be quashed. 5. In the light of the statement filed by fourth respondent that investigation reveals that petitioner is also involved in committing the offences and his part is also to be thoroughly investigated, I do not find any reason to thwart the investigation at the threshold as sought for by the petitioner. Fourth respondent is entitled to conduct a thorough investigation, including the part played by the petitioner, if any. If petitioner is aggrieved by the final report, he is at liberty to challenge in accordance with law. With that liberty petition is disposed. 6. If on investigation it appears to the investigating officer that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary, investigating officer is free to approach the Magistrate for appropriate orders. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr