IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1995 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.759 OF 2007, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- J.MOHANDAS, S/O.M.JOSHUA, RESIDING AT T.C. 26/1660, PRA-T-8, SHREEMANGALAM, PULIMOODU, GPO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS: -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. 3. A.ASOKAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.1995 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C. He is an employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board working as Senior Assistant. He had to appear for a departmental test conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission. The allegation against him is that he, without the knowledge or consent of his official superior, affixed the seal of such superior and forged his signature to facilitate appearance for that departmental test. On coming to know of the culpable indiscretion, the official superior got an enquiry conducted and the Chief Vigilance Officer of the K.S.E.B directed such superior to file a complaint before the police. It is accordingly that the complaint is filed and the F.I.R is registered. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he does not deserve to stand the trauma of an investigation against him. He prays that the F.I.R may be quashed and all further proceedings may be directed to be discontinued. Crl.M.C. No.1995 of 2008 2 3. What is the reason ? The learned counsel for the petitioner only submits that the allegations are false. Nay they are so totally improbable that they cannot but be false. The petitioner is entitled to appear in the examination. His official superior is duty bound to attest his photograph and affix his signature and seal. In these circumstances, there is no earthly reason which would prompt the petitioner to forge the signature and misuse the seal. The learned counsel contends that, in these circumstances, the offences alleged under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C will not stand. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I shall carefully avoid any detailed expression of opinion on merits about the allegations raised. Suffice it to say that I find no merit whatsoever in the contention that the allegations, if true, do not reveal any offence. Nor am I satisfied with the contention that it is inexpedient and unnecessary to direct any investigation to be conducted in the matter. 5. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C. No.1995 of 2008 3