Haneef Shiroz vs State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM** **THURSDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1944** ## **BAIL APPL. NO. 8442 OF 2022** **CRIME NO.1109 OF 2022 OF KULATHUPUZHA POLICESTATION, KOLLAM** ## **PETITIONER:** **HANEEF SHIROZ,S/O.ZAHIR, AGED 36 YEARS VARALAZHIKATHU VEEDU, THADICADU P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM, PIN - 691306** **BY ADVS. J.VISHNU ANU BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC**| |---|---| ||**PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,**| ||**ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031**| |**2**|**THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE**| ||**STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010**| |**3**|**THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF**| ||**KOLLAM RURAL, T.B, JUNCTION, KOTTARAKKARA,**| ||**KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691506**| |**4**|**THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE**| ||**KOTTARAKKARA SUB-DIVISION, T.B, JUNCTION,**| ||**KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT , PIN - 691506**| |**5**|**THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER**| ||**KULATHUPUZHA STATION, KULATHUPUZHA,,**| ||**KOLLAM DISTRICT , PIN - 691310**| **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..8741/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 2 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM** **THURSDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1944** **BAIL APPL. NO. 8741 OF 2022** **CRIME NO.1109/2022 OF Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam** **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 4:** - **1 MAHEEN KUTTI E.,S/O ISHAKH, AGED 39 YEARS BLOCK NO.41, EMS COLONY, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, , PIN - 691310** - **2 NOUSHAD,S/O ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 48 YEARS NOUFIYA MANZIL, EMS COLONY, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691310** - **3 ALEX JOHNY, S/O JOHNY, AGED 50 YEARS NELLIMOODU PUTHENVEEDU, EMS COLONY, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, , PIN - 691310** **BY ADVS. J.VISHNU ANU BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM , PIN - 682031** - **2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010** - **3 VINOD B., AGE UNKNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O BALAN, THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHEMMANTHOOR, NEAR TOWN LPS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM , PIN - 691305** - **4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KULATHUPUZHA STATION, KULATHUPUZHA,, KOLLAM DISTRICT , PIN - 691310** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON** **17.11.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..8442/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 3 ## **VIJU ABRAHAM, J.** **................................................................. B.A.Nos. 8442 & 8741 of 2022 .................................................................** Dated this the 17[th] day of November, 2022 ## **ORDER** These are applications for anticipatory bail. 2. The petitioner in B.A. No.8442 of 2022 is the 1[st] accused whereas the petitioners in B.A. No.8741 of 2022 are accused Nos. 2 to 4 in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegations in Annexure A1 FIR produced in B.A No. 8741 of 2022 are that the petitioners cheated the mother of the defacto complaint that on 17.09.2022, accused 1 to 4 committed theft of original document No.1434/82 of SRO, Anchal in the name of Rishi Estate, photocopies of document Nos. 2191/1981 & 1435/82 in the name of the de-facto complainant's mother's name, an amount of Rs.40,000/(Rupees Forty Thousand Only), 2 gold chains, 2 gold bangles, 36 grams of gold and one diamond ring. It is further alleged that on 19.09.2022, that the accused made the mother of the de-facto complainant to withdraw one lakh rupees from Kulathupuzha Branch of Federal Bank, after convincing her that it is towards conduct of case in High Court; that BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 4 the said amount was received by the first accused; that the accused forged an agreement for sale in stamp paper and submitted the same before the Sub Court, Punalur, claiming it to be a true document. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations raised in the FIR are completely false and unsustainable in law and facts. It is submitted that the 1[st] accused (petitioner in B.A.No.8442 of 2022) is the buyer of the properties. The 2[nd] accused (1[st] petitioner) is the driver of the 1[st] accused. The 3[rd] and 4[th] accused (petitioners 2 and 3) are witnesses who signed in the sale deed and the 5[th] accused is the Advocate who verified the documents and obtained an order of injunction from the civil court in favour of the 1[st] accused. The registration of crime is at the instance of the 3[rd] respondent who was disgruntled by the fact that the accused refused to mediate the civil dispute with him as the mediator. 5. It is further submitted that the entire proceedings leading to the property transaction have been recorded in video and audio and the deeds have been notarized and executed in front of witnesses. A complaint was submitted before the 3[rd] respondent Deputy Superintendent of Police on 28.09.2022 alleging that the accused had cheated the mother of the de-facto complainant and stole documents relating to the property. Without registering FIR on the basis of the said complaints for almost a month, the 3[rd] respondent forced the 1[st] accused to settle the matter in his mediation failing which the persons named in BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 5 the complaint including the Advocate of the 1[st] accused would be falsely arrayed as accused. It is submitted that the 1[st] accused entered into discussion with Smt.Panchami Raveendran, residing in Kallar Estate, Kulathupuzha, for sale of some property in Kulathupuzha. On being informed by well-wishers and Smt.Panchami herself that her estate Manager, one Mr.Tomy would attempt to sabotage the sale, the 1[st] accused recorded via video camera the entire discussions with regard to the property sale which happened on 09.09.2022, at the house of Smt.Panchami Raveendran. Audio recording was also done with regard to talks in respect of the transaction. In the said recordings, Smt. Panchami Raveendran herself says that the aforementioned estate Manager Tomy had stolen the original records pertaining to her property from her cupboard and that he is the one who is sabotaging all attempts to sell the property. The petitioners herein have both audio and video recordings pertaining to the sale and shall produce the same on directions of this Court. 6. It is submitted that at the instructions of the estate Manager, Mr.Tomy, one Chandrajith Raveendran, son of Smt. Panchami Raveendran, who was in Mumbai at the time of the Annexure A2 & A3 deeds, and had returned only on 24.09.22, submitted a complaint before the 3[rd] respondent Deputy Superintendent of Police on 28.09.2022, alleging that the accused in Annexure -A1 crime, stole documents and cheated Smt.Panchami Raveendran who was senile in her old age, of BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 6 her property. It is submitted that the accused Including the petitioners herein are totally innocent of the allegations which were not raised by Smt.Panchami Raveendran, but by her son at the instigation of Mr. Tomy. The same is evident from the words of Smt.Panchami Raveendran in the video, recorded by the 1[st] accused, wherein she herself states that Mr. Tomy is a dangerous person, who grew rich by illegally taking yield from her property and by sabotaging sale of the property. A perusal of the visuals and audio recording of Smt.Panchami Raveendran shows that she is not senile or weak as stated by the defacto complainant and was of sound mind and body when she agrees to transfer the properties covered by the Annexures-A2 and A3 for consideration to the 1[st] accused. 7. It is submitted that the 1[st] accused understood that he was being cheated and framed by persons who wanted to sabotage the sale in connivance with the 3[rd] respondent who was misusing the powers attached to his office by acting as an agent for land grabbers and criminals. The 1[st] accused therefore approached the Sub Court, Punalur, by filing a suit for specific performance and injunction, O.S.No.57 of 2022, against Smt.Panchami Raveendran with regard to the property covered by the Annexure-A2 agreement. In the said suit the 1[st] accused, Haneef Shiroz, was successful in obtaining an ad interim injunction against the schedule property in the Annexure-A2 agreement. Petitioners submit that they have been falsely implicated in the above- BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 7 said crime. 8. Learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the applications for bail. As per the complaint, the allegation is that the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant's mother and created a false document as buying their estate property without the knowledge of the defacto complainant and his brother. The defacto complainant's mother is aged about 78 years. The petitioners entered in to a discussion with the defacto complainant's mother named Panchami Raveendran who has 78 years old, for sale of their property in Kallar Estate at Kulathupuzha Grama Panchayath limit without the consent of the defacto complainant and his brother. Panchami Raveendran has two sons named Chandrajith Raveendran and Rishi Raveendran. Chandrajith Raveendran is working at Bombay and his brother Rishi is working in Britan. After the death of their father the estate property was owned by Panchami Raveendran and their sons. It is also submitted that the petitioners with the intention to cheat the mother of defacto complainant, on 10.09.2022 went to the Estate to buy the property and then made a friendly relation with her over phone and then on 17.09.2022 they purchased 6 stamp papers of Rs.100/- in the name of the mother of defacto complainant and then approached her and had given a false promise that to help her to pay pending tax of the said property, made her affix signature in all the 6 stamp papers, and had stolen Rs.40,000/-, 2 gold chains, 2 gold bangles, 36 gram gold and a diamond ring from BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 8 there. Then the accused obtained Rs.1 lakh from her by misleading that the amount will be used for the disposal of the pending case in the High Court and then made forged document in 2 stamp papers that a sale agreement of 21 acres land in the name of the mother of defacto complainant for a value of Rs.1.5 crores and had given her an advance amount of Rs.50 lakhs, and later the accused submitted the forged sale agreement before the Punalur Sub Court in a suit against the mother of defacto complainant. It is further submitted that the 1[st] accused in whose name the agreement was executed has serious criminal antecedents of having been involved in 12 other crimes, the details of which are as given below: (i) Crime No.1133/2018 under Sections 362, 394, 323, 341, 427, 406 & 34 IPC of Punalur PS. (ii) Crime No.1231/2018 under Sections 420, 306, 376, 323 IPC r/w.75 of JJ Act of Punalur PS. (iii) Crime No.2531/2018 under Sections 354(a), 345(b), 306, 456 IPC r/w.Section 67 of IT Act of Punalur PS - (iv) Crime No.55 of 2006 under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, & 149 IPC of Anchal PS. - (v) Crime No.1009 of 2010 under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(I) & 34 IPC of Anchal PS (vi) Crime No.2255/2018 under Sections 420, 463, 464, 468 IPC of Anchal PS. BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 9 - (vii) Crime No.560/2022 under Sections 420, 423, IPC of Anchal PS - (viii) Crime No.561/2022 under Sections 420, 423 IPC of Anchal PS - (ix) Crime No.1381/2022 under Sections 420, 406, 464, 465, 468, - 471, IPC of Anchal PS - (x) Crime No.381/2019 under Sections 324, IPC and Section 75 of JJ Act of Upputhara PS of Idukki District. - (xi) Crime No.314/2020 under Sections 489A, 489C IPC of Upputhara PS of Idukki District - (xii) Crime No.729/2019 under Sections 324 IPC and Section 75 of JJ Act of Ottappalam PS of Palakkad District. The investigation is only at the initial stage, and custodial interrogation is absolutely necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. It is seen that the alleged execution of a false sale agreement is in favour of the 1[st] accused who is the applicant in B.A. No. 8442 of 2022. The petitioners in B.A.No.8741 of 2022 is the driver (1[st] petitioner) and witnesses who witnessed the execution of the deed (petitioners 2 and 3). The 5[th] accused is an advocate who verified the documents and obtained an order of injunction from the civil court in favour of the 1[st] accused. Taking into consideration the fact that execution of the sale agreement is in favour of the 1[st] accused who is the petitioner in B.A. No.8442 of 2022 and also considering his serious criminal antecedents of having been involved in 12 other criminal cases, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in B.A. No. BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 10 8442 of 2022. As regards the petitioners in B.A. No.8741 of 2022, they have aided the 1[st] accused in the commission of the alleged offence and they have no other criminal antecedents also. Therefore, I am inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in B.A. No.8741 of 2022. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam on 22.11.2022 at 11.00 a.m. and shall make themselves available for interrogation on that day or on any other day/days and time as directed by the investigating officer. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. In the event of the arrest of the petitioners in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam, the petitioners shall be produced before the jurisdictional court on the very same day and shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions. - (i) The petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional court. (ii) They shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam as when required for the investigation. (iii) They shall not attempt to influence the defacto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam BA Nos.8442 & 8741 of 2022 11 ## (iv) They shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.1109 of 2022 of Kulathupuzha Police Station, Kollam may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail. It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioners even when the petitioners are on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in **Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663)** . In the result, BA No. 8442/2022 is dismissed whereas BA No. 8741/2022 is allowed as above. Sd/- **VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE** cks