IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7545 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.259/07 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ RAGHU WARRIER, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.VARIATH RAMACHANDRAN, B-301, 'RADHA GOVIND', NEAR SIDDHARTH NAGAR, OFF.WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, BORIVILI (EAST), MUMBAI 400 066. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2009, THE COURT ON 06/01/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7545 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420 and 466 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner (first accused), along with other accused (accused 2 to 5), allegedly forged a birth certificate and used the same as genuine in furtherance of a common intention. The certificate relates to first petitioner and it is used for production before a company in Netherland, where petitioner was employed. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was born in Kerala, but he was educated in Maharashtra. Though his name was in the birth certificate as “C.Raghu”, in the school certificate, his name was shown as “Warrier Raghu Ramachandran”. His name was so entered in the school records, in accordance with, the procedure followed in the schools in the State of Maharashtra. But, petitioner got a job in Netherland and the company insisted that a certificate is to be obtained from the concerned local authority showing that both these persons are one and the same. BA.7545/08 2 4. Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that accordingly, petitioner requested his uncle at the native place to get the document from the locality authority. He entrusted the matter with some others and they obtained the certificate and it was forwarded to first accused. Petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations made. He never knew that it is a forged document. There was nothing to hide and actually, both the persons are one and the same. He has produced the certificate in all bonafides. But, in case petitioner is arrested, he will be put to irreparable injury and loss, since other accused are granted bail on their surrender. But, petitioner being working abroad, if he comes to India, it is likely that he will be arrested. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that it is true that petitioner was not present in India at the time when the documents were allegedly forged. There is no case for prosecution that two persons are different. It is also submitted that the co-accused is granted bail. On hearing both sides, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner and the following order is passed: BA.7545/08 3 Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within two weeks from today and he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court concerned, on the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer within three days from the date of release and make himself available for interrogation and co-operate with the investigation. iii). Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witnesses or intimidate them or commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.