Sreeja R. v. State of Kerala and Sasthamcotta Police Station (Addl. R3 impleaded)

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN`** ``` MONDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1944 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023`** CRIME NO.1885/2022 OF SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION ## **`PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED`** ``` SREEJA R., W/O.BABU CHANDRAN PILLAI @ B.C. PILLAI, AGED 54 YEARS KALLARAYIL VEEDU, KUNNATHOOR, MANAKKARA, SASTHAMCOTTAH P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 690521 BY ADVS. B.MOHANLAL P.S.PREETHA ASWIN V. NAIR KARTHIK J SEKHAR ABIJITH M. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTAH POLICE STATION, SASTHAMCOTTAH P.O., KOLLAM , PIN - 690521 *ADDL R3 IS IMPLEADED ADDL.R3RAJENDRAN, AGED 57 YEARS S/O SADASIVAN, PLAMMOOTTIL VEEDU, MANAKARA MURI, SASTHAMKOTTA VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690521 ``` ``` *ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 19/01/2023 IN CRL.MA.NO.1/2023. ``` ``` BY ADVS. MANU RAMACHANDRAN M.KIRANLAL R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SAMEER M NAIR GEETHU KRISHNAN SAILAKSHMI MENON ``` ``` R1 & R2 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.G.MANU ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 2 ``` ## ORDER ## Dated this 20[th] day of February, 2023. This is an application for anticipatory bail, filed by the 2[nd] accused in Crime No.1885/2022 of Sasthamcotta Police Station, where accused Nos.1 and 2 alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant, in detail. 3. I have perused the documents placed by the learned Public Prosecutor, the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and the de facto complainant also. 4. This crime was registered, acting on a private complaint, lodged by one Rajendran during December, 2022, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta. The allegation in the complaint as well as the prosecution is that, the 1[st] accused, among accused Nos.1 to 3 (accused ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 3 ``` No.3 is an unidentified person), telephoned the de facto complainant at 6.00 p.m. on 6.10.2018 and demanded Rs.18,500/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand Five Hundred only) before closure of the recruitment on 30.10.2018, for the post of Engineer Trainee in Railway, with offer to provide the said job. Accordingly, on 8.10.2018, the accused in the complaint, received 18,500/(Rupees Eighteen Thousand Five Hundred only) and it was made to believe that Rs.18,500/- was the expense for the 1[st] accused, to visit Chennai, as part of arranging the job. Thereafter, on 16.10.2018, the accused obtained Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh only) from the de facto complainant and Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) more on 13.10.2018, assuring the job. The further allegation is that, the job was offered as a temporary arrangement with assurance that the posting would be made permanent, after one year. The allegation goes to the extend that the accused herein, on receipt of Rs.13 Lakh, had also given fake appointment letter and training letter. But later, it was revealed that accused herein cheated and defrauded the de facto complainant, by forging documents of the Railway and using the same as genuine. Accordingly, it is alleged that accused herein committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 4`** 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is also aggrieved in the matter of loosing her money, since she also paid Rs.5 Lakh to one Smt.Geetha Rani, believing the offer to get an employment of a Clerk in Southern Railway. He also submitted that, there is no document to show that the accused, including the the petitioner herein, are the persons who received the money from the de facto complainant and also the complaint is much belated. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the de facto complainant also given money to Geetha Rani, as done by the petitioner and Geetha Rani cheated and defrauded 84 persons in Kollam District, with the same offer in similar fashion. Highlighting the anomaly and the factual events as submitted, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. While the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant zealously opposed bail and submitted that, the entire submissions, at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, are false. According to him, even though the petitioner would contend that she also lost money, no complaint registered in this regard and therefore, the said allegation is false. He also would submit that, receipt of money from the de facto complainant on the offer to provide job, as discussed hereinabove, is an admitted fact and the ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 5 ``` same has been stated in paragraph No.3 of the bail application to the effect that 'the husband of the petitioner paid Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) to Smt.Geetha Rani to get employment to her son Sri.Adharsh, to the post of Clerk in the Southern Railway and the de facto complainant has paid Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) to the employment to the post of Junior Engineer in the Southern Railway’. The learned counsel for the petitioner failed to give reasonable explanation for the inordinate delay of more than four years, in launching the complaint, though admittedly a forged letter was given, suggesting training for the post offered, starting from 8.7.2019 to 30.7.2019. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor shared the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the de facto complainant and submitted that, prima facie, the offences are made out. Therefore, arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary. 8. To be on the crux of this matter, the allegation of the prosecution/the de facto complainant is that, as on 8.10.2018 Rs.18,500/(Rupees Eighteen Thousand Five Hundred only) was received, offering employment to the daughter of the de facto complainant Smt.Saranya. S.Raj, to the post of Junior Engineer on temporary basis, with offer to make it as ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 6`** permanent within a period of one year and subsequently, Rs.13 Lakh also was received by the accused from the complainant in this crime. It is true that the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the son of the petitioner also was given a fake appointment letter and training letter by Geetha Rani, on payment of Rs.5 Lakh, by the petitioner. In this regard, in paragraph No.3 of the petition, the averments are extracted hereunder: 3. The Petitioner is aggressor in the above crime. The allegation stated in the complaint and FIR is totally wrong, incorrect, misleading and it is contrary to facts. The husband of the Petitioner Sri. Babu Chandran Pillai and the Defacto Complainant approached Smt. Geetha Rani, Thachottukavu, Thiruvananthapuram during November 2018 through her agents Sri.Prakash, Smt. Vidhya and Sri. Rohit belongs to Kollam to get employment in the Southern Railway through the Railway Recruitment Board and the Agents were introduced by Sri. Pradeep, belongs to Sasthamcottah. The Husband of the Petitioner paid Rs. 5,00,000/- to Smt. Geetha Rani to get employment to her son Sri.Adharsh B.S. to the post of Clerk in the Southern Railway and the defacto complainant has paid Rs. 5,00,000/- to get employment to the post of Junior Engineer in the southern Railway. Smt. Geetha Rani and others had issued appointment orders to the Petitioner's son and daughter of the Defacto Complainant. The applicants appeared for the Interview before the office of Southern Railway, Thirichy, Smt. Geetha Rani and Sri.Prakash assured to get appointment to the Applicants and ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 7 ``` they were returned back. The Railway Recruitment Board found that the orders produced the applicants were forged documents created by Smt. Geetha Rani and Others. 9. As per Annexures R3(b) and (c), fake appointment letter and training letter were given before 8.7.2019 (the letters did not contain any date), but the de facto complainant not made complainant till 2022 and complaint in this regard, has been lodged only during December, 2022. Meantime, it is to be read out from Annexure A5 that, crime was registered against one Geetha Rani on similar allegations regarding issuance of fake appointment letters and training letters to 63 persons and for which, separate crimes registered and the same are on investigation, by the Crime Branch. It appears that, the amounts were given for getting backdoor appointment against the recruitment rules. Since no materials prima facie, available before this Court, to see the payment of money to the petitioner herein and the allegation was raised at a much belated stage, the prosecution allegation is a matter of detailed investigation. I leave the same to the domain of the Investigating Officer, for fair and impartial investigation to unearth the truth of the matter. In order to facilitate investigation, the petitioner shall be directed to co-operate with the investigation, by subjecting herself for interrogation, for ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 8`** ## two days, to aid the investigation. Accordingly, I am inclined to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail, by imposing the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioner for two days in between 10.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. on those two working days. In the event of her arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioner before the jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself. ii. On such production, jurisdictional court shall release the petitioner on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/(Rupees thirty thousand only) by herself and by two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court. iii. The petitioner shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Monday in between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. from the date of release on bail, for a period of two months or till the final report will be filed, whichever occur first. iv. The petitioner, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner. v. The petitioner shall not commit any offence during currency ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 188 OF 2023 9 ``` of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted. Sd/- A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE Bb //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE