2025:KER:28124 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 3368 OF 2025 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2025 IN CRMC NO.578 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CRIME NO.1018/CB/TVM/R/2024 OF CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: RAJEEV M AGED 64 YEARS S/O MOHAN, PUTHEN PURAYIL, PILAPPUZHA, HARIPPAD P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA NOW RESIDING AT SANTHI BHAVAN, KUNNAM POST, PAINUMOODU, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 690108. BY ADVS. P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) S.SAMEER AMANI R.S. 2025:KER:28124 2 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN – 682031. 2 DETECTIVE INSPECTOR II, CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 695008. SMT REKHA S., SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 01.04.2025, THE COURT ON 02.04.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:28124 3 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J. ----------------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2025 O R D E R This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for an order of pre-arrest bail. 2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in crime No.538 of 2024 of Thumba Police Station (re-registered as crime No.1018/CB/TVM/R of 2024 of Crime Branch, Thiruvananthapuram). The offences originally alleged are punishable under Sections 120B, 201, 419, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967. Offences punishable under Sections 7(c) and 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were later added and the investigation was transferred to Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau. 3. The prosecution case is as follows: The accused persons in furtherance of their common 2025:KER:28124 4 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 intention to cheat the Government conspired with each other by fabricating false documents and presenting the same before the Regional Passport Authority, Thiruvananthapuram to secure a passport for the 1st accused/petitioner herein. The Authority had forwarded the application and the appended documents to the Thumba Police Station for verification on 31.05.2024. Accused No.7, who was a Police Officer in the Thumba Police Station knowing that the documents furnished by the petitioner were fake, compelled the defacto complainant to give a favourable report on the passport application. On verification by the defacto complainant, the documents furnished by the petitioner were found to be forged ones. Thus, the accused allegedly have committed the aforementioned offences. 4. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 5. The petitioner filed Crl.M.C.No.578 of 2025 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram seeking pre-arrest bail. That petition was dismissed as per Annexure A3 order. 2025:KER:28124 5 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 The learned Sessions Judge after perusing the materials on record observed that the petitioner in connivance with other accused created false documents and submitted the same as genuine for obtaining the passport. Holding that granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner at the nascent stage of the investigation will affect a proper investigation in the matter dismissed the application. The law laid down by the Apex Court in Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and another [(2012) 4 SCC 379], HDFC Bank Ltd. v. J.J.Mannan @ J.M.John Paul and another [(2010) 1 SCC 679] and Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar [2024 KHC OnLine 6137] were placed reliance on to decline pre-arrest bail. 6. The records said to have been forged are in the custody of the police. The investigating officer could not interrogate the petitioner yet. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner’s presence is essential to gather details as to how he could obtain fake documents in the name of George, how he obtained his previous passport, whether he is involved in any 2025:KER:28124 6 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 other offence, etc. The possibility of the petitioner fleeing from justice in the event of granting him bail is also highlighted. 7. The learned Senior Counsel, in answer, would submit that detention of the petitioner for the purpose of collecting evidence concerning the aforementioned aspects is unnecessary and the petitioner is prepared to co-operate with the investigation. 8. The offences alleged are serious in nature. Obtaining a fake passport can affect even national security. When a public servant is involved in such a nefarious act, the offence becomes more serious. Therefore, it is of no doubt that the matter has to be seriously investigated into. Having the documents falsely created at the instance of the petitioner been already seized by the police, collection of the remaining materials relating to those documents is possible even without keeping the petitioner under detention. No criminal antecedents is alleged against the petitioner. Considering the said facts and also that accused No.8 was already granted 2025:KER:28124 7 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 anticipatory bail by this Court as per Annexure-A2 order, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted pre-arrest bail, subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, this petition is allowed, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks from today; (ii) In the event of the petitioner’s arrest, the investigating officer shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount; (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation, as and when directed by the investigating officer; (iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement or threat to the defacto complainant or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; (v) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of Thiruvananthapuram District without obtaining permission from the jurisdictional court; (vi) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence while on bail; (vii) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, 2025:KER:28124 8 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law; (viii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall also be filed before the jurisdictional court; and (ix) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the investigating officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663]. Sd/- P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE dkr 2025:KER:28124 9 Bail Appl.No.3368 of 2025 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3368/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 538 OF 2024 OF THUMBA POLICE STATION, DATED 15/06/2024 ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT'S ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER IN BA NO. 5214 OF 2024, FILED BY THE 8TH ACCUSED, DATED 18/10/2024. ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER IN CRIMINAL M.C NO. 578 OF 2025 OF THE DISTRICT SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 28/02/2025.