Nazar Pakideri vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 19635 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
    FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
                      BAIL APPL. NO. 4512 OF 2021
  CRIME NO.140/2021 OF PANTHEERANKAVU POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 532/2021 OF COURT OF SESSIONS,
                                 KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

            NAZAR PAKIDERI
            AGED 45 YEARS
            S/O.KOYAKKUTTY HAJI,
            PAKIDERI HOUSE,
            P.O.PANTHEERAMKAVU,
            PERUMANNA AMSOM AND PUTHUR DESOM,
            KOZHIKODE TALUK.

            BY ADV SUNNY MATHEW



RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031.

    2       STATION HOUSE OFFICER
            PANTHEERAMKAVU POLICE STATION,
            KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 019.


     THIS   BAIL   APPLICATION    HAVING     COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 4512 OF 2021

                                     2

                              ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.140/2021 of

Pantheeramkavu Police Station, Kozhikode District registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal

Code, the petitioner, who is the 1st accused has moved this

application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The allegation of the prosecution is that, this petitioner

had forged certain documents and submitted the same before the

Perumanna Grama Panchayath for residential certificate. On

verification of the same by the officials, it was revealed that he had

forged the documents with the connivance of the 2 nd accused and

thereby they together have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

he has absolutely no knowledge about the documents created by

the 2nd accused. In fact, he is having certain property, out of the

same, he had alienated about 10 cents of land in favour of his son.

His intention was to construct a residential building in the remaining

property. So he approached the 2nd accused, who is a civil engineer

to prepare a plan for the building to apply for permit for

construction of the building. So as to prepare the building plan, he BAIL APPL. NO. 4512 OF 2021

had handed over the copy of his title deed also to the 2 nd accused.

No other documents have been handed over to him by this

petitioner. But later it was realized that the 2 nd accused had forged

certain documents and submitted before the Grama Panchayath

and pursuant to the complaint lodged by the officials of the

Panchayath this petitioner has also been implicated in this case. In

fact, he is innocent.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted that,

an ownership certificate as well as a building certificate have been

submitted by the 2nd accused and on investigation it is revealed that

those documents are forged documents. So search was conducted

in the residence of the 2nd accused and his lap top and such other

articles were seized and now the investigation is well in progress.

5. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well

the learned Public Prosecutor, it appears that the allegations of the

prosecution are pointing to the 2nd accused, who had forged

documents. In fact, this petitioner has entrusted the copy of his

title deed only for the purpose of preparing the plan as he was

treated as a service provider. But he never entrusted his tax receipt

or such other documents to enable him to prepare the plan. But BAIL APPL. NO. 4512 OF 2021

only when the police has intervened and called him to the police

station, he came to know that such documents were forged and

produced before the Panchayath authorities by the 2 nd accused. In

fact, he is totally unaware of the same and he has not committed

any offence as alleged. Still, as he is having an apprehension that

he will be arrested, I think that this application for pre-arrest bail

can be granted as sought for by the learned counsel for the

petitioner. So this application will stand allowed subject to the

following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing

a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand

only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to

the satisfaction of the investigating officer in the event

of his arrest.

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer for

interrogation as and when required by him, in writing.

(iii) He shall co-operate with the investigation and trial

of the case.

(iv) He shall not directly or indirectly, make any

inducement, threat or promise to any person

acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade BAIL APPL. NO. 4512 OF 2021

him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any

police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(v) He shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned

Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the

law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE mpm