IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2009 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5944 of 2009 CRIME NO.391 OF 2009 OF VARANDARAPPILLY POLICE STATION,THRISSUR APPLICANTS/ACCUSED NO.11 & 12 ------------------------------------------------- 1. MURALI , AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.VEMBANATTU MUKUNDAN MENON, KAVIL DESOM, KODAKARA VILLAGE. 2. JOSHY @ THOMAS, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.THALIYAKUZHI JOHNY, KANNIKKARA DESOM, KALLETTUMKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REP.THE S.I.OF POLICE, VARANDARAPPILLY POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/10/2009, ALONGWITH B.A.NO.5970 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 26/10/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999, 6046 AND 6234 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of October, 2009 O R D E R These Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by some of the accused persons in Crime No.391 of 2009 of Varantharappilly Police Station. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 465, 471, 474, 475 and 476 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The number of the Bail Application, rank of the accused persons, names of the accused persons and date of their arrest are shown below: B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 2 :: Number of the Bail Application Rank of the accused Name of the accused Date of arrest B.A. 5944 of 2009 A11, A12 Murali Joshi @ Thomas 1-10-2009 B.A. No. 5970 of 2009 A7 Babu, son of Ananthan 19-9-2009 B.A. No. 5998 of 2009 A2 Babu, son of Anthony 18-9-2009 B.A. No. 5999 of 2009 A3, A4, A6, A9 Vinodan Kamaludeen Raghunandanan Venugopal 18-9-2009 B.A. No. 6046 of 2009 A8 Anil 18-9-2009 B.A. No. 6234 of 2009 A10 Lijo 19-9-2009 3. The case of the prosecution is the following: On 17-9-2009, the Circle Inspector of Police, Pudukkad got secret information that forged driving licences are kept for sale by Rafi alias Kunhumon, the first accused, in the quarters at Chimmini Irrigation Dam. Search was conducted at the quarters. 20 driving licences, school certificates, electoral identity cards, photocopies of passports, passport size photographs of 29 persons, slips of papers showing B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 3 :: the address of different persons and Rs. 12,000/- were seized. It was revealed that the driving licences and other documents were forged ones intended to be sold to the required persons. It was revealed that the forged driving licences were given by Babu, the second accused. 4. Investigation revealed that the other accused persons were also involved in the offences. The second accused is the person who supplied the forged and counterfeited driving licences to the first accused. The third accused made the driving licences at the residence of the 2nd accused. The fourth accused forged the signatures in the driving licences. Accused Nos.6 and 9 were engaged in the sale of forged driving licences. Accused No.7 counterfeited the seal of Regional Transport office. Accused No.8 is the canvassing agent. Accused No.10, a photographer, got the print outs. Accused Nos.11 and 12 are auto consultants on whose request, the counterfeiting and forgery took place. It is alleged that the accused persons acted as a team for commission of the offences. 5. Investigation revealed that forged driving licences were B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 4 :: being given to the needy persons. In some cases, driving licences of Regional Transport Offices in other States were also forged and the change of address of the licence holder was effected by committing forgery. It is revealed that in the whole exercise, no application was submitted by any person in the Regional Transport Office, no fee was paid and the Regional Transport Office was never involved in the issue of licence or in effecting the change of address in the licence. In other words, the allegation is that the accused persons acted as if they were running a parallel Regional Transport Office. It is alleged that all the necessary documents and seals were manufactured, forged and counterfeited by the accused persons. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no material to connect the accused with the offence. It is submitted that they are innocent. They are in judicial custody for a long period and there is no reason why they should not be released on bail. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is not complete, particularly in respect of the Passports and school certificates. It is submitted that if the petitioners are B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 5 :: released on bail at this stage, they would tamper with the evidence and indulge in activities to intimidate and influence the witnesses. 8. The offences alleged against the petitioners are very grave. It would appear that several persons resort to illegal methods to acquire driving licences. Persons who are ready to accomplish the demand of such people are available. The persons who acquire such forged driving licences and use the same as genuine ones as well as the persons who manufacture and arrange the same are guilty. It is very difficult to find out whether a driving licence is genuine or fake. If persons are allowed to indulge in such criminal activities, it would not only cause loss to the State but it would create two types of licence holders, namely, those who get the driving licence after paying the necessary fee and undergoing the required tests and those who do not do so. If offences of this nature become widespread, the losers would be State and the law abiding people. Persons indulging in such offences should be prosecuted with all seriousness. They should not be allowed to tamper with the evidence and intimidate or influence the witnesses. 9. I am not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioners B.A. NOS.5944, 5970, 5998, 5999,6046 & 6234 OF 2009 :: 6 :: that there are no materials to connect them with the offence. If the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor is without substance. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Applications are dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge