High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeAnticipatory bail granted; conditions as descri...

Pramod Kumar Singh v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 3958 OF 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Viju Abraham
Judgment Date
2023-01-04
Court Decision / Holding
This application is allowed. Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner with limited custody for the purpose of investigation. The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on 16.01.2023 at 11:00 AM and be available for interrogation. On arrest, the petitioner shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court the same day and released on bail subject to: (i) bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties; (ii) appearance before the investigating officer every Saturday at 11:00 AM until final report; (iii) reporting as required; (iv) not to influence or intimidate witnesses; (v) not to commit any other crime while on bail. Violation may lead to cancellation of bail. The court clarifies that police investigation and recoveries may proceed even while on bail, following the Apex Court decision in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663).
Final Disposition
Anticipatory bail granted; conditions as described above.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Pramod Kumar Singh

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • K. I. Abdul Rasheed
  • • Deepa Sasidharan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Nima Jacob (Public Prosecutor)

Case Synopsis & Summary

Pramod Kumar Singh, second accused in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam, sought anticipatory bail before the Kerala High Court. He is alleged to have aided the first accused in forging a Continuous Discharge Certificate (CDC) to secure seafaring employment on MV Golsan from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019 and to present the forged document to the Seaport Emigration Office in Cochin on 01.03.2022, thereby facilitating offences under sections 465, 468 and 471 read with 34 IPC. The prosecution contends that the first accused, who is on loggerhead with the petitioner, forged the seals with the petitioner’s assistance, and that the petitioner transferred Rs. 1.5 lakh to the first accused via bank transfer as part of the transaction. The petitioner claims he was falsely implicated and that the disputed voyage entry in the DG Shipping profile of the first accused corroborates his claim of no involvement. He contends he operates a business of repairing ship components and matching candidates for seafarer recruitment, and that the alleged influence by the first accused is the sole basis for his arrest. The court, after considering the material and the need for a fair investigation, granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, including surrender on 16.01.2023, bond and two sureties, periodic appearances, reporting requirements, and a restriction on interference, referencing the Apex Court’s Sushila Aggarwal decision to permit police action during bail.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 465 IPCSection 468 IPCSection 471 read with Section 34 IPC

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that he was falsely implicated and that the disputed CDC entry is recorded in the profile of the first accused on the DG Shipping website, indicating no involvement by him. He highlights his lack of criminal record and his business of arranging seafarer engagements, asserting that the first accused, who is on loggerhead with him, misused the process and sought revenge. He seeks anticipatory bail with limited custody for investigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The State/prosecution relies on the first accused’s arrest and his statement that the petitioner assisted in forging the discarding and that the petitioner transferred Rs. 1.5 lakh to the first accused, arguing substantial involvement and seeking continued investigation before releasing the accused on bail.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveCited to support that police may investigate and effect recoveries even when the accused is on bail.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Pramod Kumar Singh v. State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM WEDNESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 14TH POUSHA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 3958 OF 2022 CRIME NO.200/2022 OF Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:`** ``` PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH AGED 44 YEARS FLAT NO. 003, SAI TRIMURTI APARTMENT, SHAHABAJ GAON, NEAR KALPESH KUMAR MURTIKAR, SECTOR-19, CBD BELAPUR, NAVI MUMBAI, THANE, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 400614 BY ADVS. K.I.ABDUL RASHEED DEEPA SASIDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, PIN - 682031 BY SMT. NIMA JACOB (PP) ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 2 ## **VIJU ABRAHAM , J.** **=========================== Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 ============================ Dated this the 4[th] day of January, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2. The petitioner is the 2[nd] accused in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam District alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution allegation is that, the 1[st] accused with the intention of obtaining job for higher salary in the vessel by name MV JSW Manikgad, forged his Continuous Discharge Certificate (CDC) as if he had worked in the ship M.V. Golsan from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019 with the help of the petitioner by affixing forged seal and by producing the same by the 1[st] accused before the Seaport Emigration Office, Cochin on 01.03.2022 and thereby committed the alleged offences. 4. The petitioner submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the above said crime and he has been arrayed Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 3 as an accused solely based on the statement of the 1[st] accused, who is on logger head with the petitioner. The petitioner is a native of Uttar Pradesh and he was residing in Mumbai. He is engaged in the business of repairing ship components and also identifying the suitable candidates for companies who has got license for recruiting seafarers to various ships. By the beginning of January this year, the 1[st] accused came to the petitioner’s office and requested to arrange a job in any vessel as an ‘Oiler’ claiming that he has experience in various vessels since 2016. He also showed his Continuous Discharge Certificate (CDC) which is an identity document issued by the Director General of Shipping. The said document also carries the record of all the ships sailed by a sea-farer during his Merchant Navy career. Based on the document provided the petitioner had made arrangements for his engagement as an oiler in the vessel by name JSW Manigkad under the management of Su-Nav Ship management Pvt Ltd. Accordingly he signed in the said ship on 03.01.2022, but he had to sign off from the ship on 06.01.2022 as he was contracted Covid-19 pandemic. It is submitted that while signing on in the above vessel he had produced his CDC which contained his sailing experience from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019 in the vessel by name Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 4 GOLSAN under M/s Al Huzair Marine Services Pvt. Ltd. He had also produced his profile page maintained in the website of Director General of Shipping which also contained the above entry regarding his experience in the ship ‘GOLSAN’. 5. Since the 1[st] accused could not continue his job due to Covid-19, he persuaded the petitioner to arrange another chance and accordingly the petitioner has arranged another contract for the 1[st] accused in another vessel by name JSW Suryagad under the management of M/s Su-Nav Ship Management Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly he signed in the ship on 21.02.2022. However regarding the service charges to be paid to the petitioner, there arose a dispute, and the 1[st] accused left the job quarelling with the petitioner. 6. While so, on 13.05.2022 the petitioner has received a call at Mumbai from the Harbour Police Station, Cochin and informed him that the 1[st] accused has been arrested by them pursuant to a complaint by Seaport Emigration Office, Willington Island, alleging that in the CDC produced by the 1[st] accused, the entry with regard to his experience in the vessel GOLSAN from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019 has been forged by affixing forged seals. It was also stated that the 1[st] accused has stated before the Police that it is with the Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 5 assistance of the petitioner the fake seal of the vessel has been affixed and further that the petitioner has been implicated as the 2[nd] accused in the above case. 7. It is submitted that the petitioner has been roped in this case by the 1[st] accused with twin motives, to wreak vengeance against the petitioner and also to protect the real culprit from the clutches of law. The petitioner’s innocence could be revealed from the records and the disputed engagement in the vessel ‘GOLSAN’ during the period from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019 is entered in Annexure A2 profile of the 1[st] accused maintained in website of the Director General of Shipping in which it is specifically recorded that the 1[st] accused has sailed in the vessel GOLSAN from 05.08.2018 to 12.05.2019. 8. The specific case of the petitioner is that entry of the disputed journey in the profile of the 1[st] accused itself is sufficient material to prove that the petitioner has no role in the above said case. 9. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that 1[st] accused was arrested and based on his statement, the alleged entry was made by the petitioner herein and he has transferred an amount of Rs. 1.5 lakhs to Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 6 the account of the petitioner through bank. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, granting limited custody for the purpose of the investigation. In the result, this application is allowed. The Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station on 16.01.2023 at 11 AM and shall make himself available for interrogation on that day or any other day/days as directed by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station, the petitioner shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court on the very same day and shall be released on bail subject to the following stringent conditions. - (i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court. Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 7 - (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station, on every Saturday at 11.00 a.m. until filing of the final report. - (iii) Petitioner shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the investigation. - (iv) The petitioner shall not attempt to influence the defacto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station; - (v) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 200/2022 of Harbour Police Station 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 petitioner even when the petitioner is on bail as per the Bail Appln. No. 3958 of 2022 8 judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663). **Sd/VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE** sbk/-