Karim @ Abdul Karim v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.09.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA 1.Karim @ Abdul Karim 2.Ahammed Samsudden ... Petitionerss Vs.

State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Forgery Wing Team - 27 A, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai.

(Crime No.163/2022).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail in connection with the Crime No.163 of 2022 pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitionerss : Mr.E.Sampath Kumar For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.08.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 511 of IPC, in Crime No.163 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Regan Richard/A1 attempted to obtain U.S. Visa by submitting fraudulent visa application. During interview, it was found that the documents submitted by him were fabricated one. During the course of the investigation, it was found that the petitioners only have created forged documents for the said A1.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case and further submits that as travel agents other than helping A1 to appear for the interview, the petitioners have not fabricated any documents. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners. 2/6

4. The Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that one Regan Richard/A1 attempted to obtain U.S. Visa by submitting fraudulent visa application. During interview, it was found that the documents submitted by him were fabricated one. During the course of the investigation, it was found that the petitioners only have created forged documents for the said A1 and further submits that the petitioners are running travel agency and they do not have any previous cases pending against them. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty Five 3/6

thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for Exclusive Trial of CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 4/6

in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

30.09.2022 Sma To

1. The Metropolitan Magistrate for Exclusive Trial of CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Forgery Wing Team - 27 A, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai.

3. The Central Puzhal Jail, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J., Sma 30.09.2022 6/6