Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

M. Raffi And Ors v. State Of Kerala And Ors

M. Raffi And Ors v. State Of Kerala And Ors

(High Court Of Kerala)

BAIL APPL. NO. 2878 OF 2022 | 07-04-2022

1. The petitioner herein is arrayed as the 4th accused in VC 1/2019/SCE on the file of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Special Cell, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Section 109, 120(B), 465, 471 IPC and Section 13(1) read with Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(b) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 and Section 471 and 34 IPC.

2. The crux of the allegation is that proceedings were initiated against one police officer on an allegation that he had amassed wealth disproportionate to the known source of income. To account the pecuniary resources, the 1st accused allegedly colluded with the petitioner herein and brought into existence two forged documents, one purported to be an agreement for sale of 9 cents of land with residential building owned by the wife of the 1st accused and another document purported to be a loan agreement for lending an amount of Rs.10 lakh by the 3rd accused to the 2nd accused. Crime was registered and in the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested and was remanded on 29.03.2022. He is in custody. The bail application filed by him as Crl.M.P. No.36/2022 was rejected. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking bail.

3. Opposing the application, the learned Special Government Pleader for Vigilance placed before me a detailed statement, wherein the facts of the case and the materials gathered by the investigating agency in the course of investigation have been detailed. It seems that though the allegations are serious, the investigation seems to have progressed forward. Since the crucial documents stated to be forged are in custody of the police and in the nature of the materials gathered, I feel that further custody of the petitioner may not be warranted.

4. Accordingly, I am inclined to grant bail to petitioner on the following conditions:

i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for the like sum each.

ii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the court below. If at any point of time, the petitioner genuinely requires the passport, appropriate orders can be passed by the Trial Court.

iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

iv) He shall not interfere in the course of investigation and shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the witnesses.

Advocate List

  • T. V.GEORGE LINDA GEORGE

  • SRI. A.RAJESH, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER

Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/KerHC/2022/1019
Head Note

A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Grant of — Accused in disproportionate assets case — Alleged to have brought into existence two forged documents, one purported to be an agreement for sale of 9 cents of land with residential building owned by the wife of the 1st accused and another document purported to be a loan agreement for lending an amount of Rs.10 lakh by the 3rd accused to the 2nd accused — Held, though allegations are serious, investigation seems to have progressed forward — Since crucial documents stated to be forged are in custody of the police and in the nature of materials gathered, further custody of petitioner may not be warranted — Hence, petitioner granted bail (Paras 2 to 4)