The High Court · 2025

BY ADV SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1 2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TRICHUR EAST POLICE STATION, TRICHUR-680001. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 3 * ADDL R3 SENIOR MANAGER KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THRISSUR BRANCH, HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR * ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27.01.2025 IN CRL.M.A 1/2025 IN CRL.R.P 1531/2016. BY ADV K.S.ARUN KUMAR SMT SEETHA S, SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.R.P No.1531 of 2016 2 ORDER The petitioner is the 3rd accused in CC No.128/2010 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur. He faces prosecution, along with seven other accused, for the commission of offence under Sections 420, 423, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474, 476, 120B read with Section 34 IPC. In the present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings against him in the said case.

2. Prosecution case is that accused Nos.3 to 7, pursuant to a criminal conspiracy, forged records to make it appear that a person by name ‘Alavi’, who was having 110 acres of land in Valad village in Wayanad district, had executed power of attorney and other documents in favour of the 1st accused in respect of the said property, and that by making use of the above documents, they managed to avail loan from the Bank where the 8th accused was working as the Manager. It is stated that, with the connivance of the 8th accused, the accused managed to siphon off a total amount of Rs.2.9 Crores from the Bank, and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.

3. As per order dated 4.3.2015 in Crl.M.P No.8335/2012, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, discharged the 1st accused in connection with all other offences except Section 202 IPC. Thereafter, this Crl.R.P No.1531 of 2016 3 Court, as per order dated 04.06.2015 in Crl.R.P No.619/2015, exonerated the 1st accused in respect of offence under Section 202 IPC as well, leaving open the option to the learned Magistrate to invoke Section 319 Cr.P.C, if the circumstances warranted.

4. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that none of the offences as alleged in the Final Report are attracted against him in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is stated that a person by name ‘Alavi’, who was originally included as the 3rd accused, was later on omitted from the Final Report, since the Investigating Agency was not able to trace out his whereabouts. According to the petitioner, he has been arraigned as the 3rd accused without any basis. Thus, it is contended that the proceedings against the petitioner, are liable to be quashed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the additional 3rd respondent, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

6. It is seen from the Final Report and the accompanying records relied on by the Investigating Agency, that the petitioner herein has been arraigned as the 3rd accused on the basis of convincing materials collected during the investigation in this case. CW8 and CW10 are the pivotal witnesses cited by the Investigating Agency to establish the involvement of Crl.R.P No.1531 of 2016 4 the petitioner in the commission of offence alleged in this case. It is seen that the statements of the aforesaid witnesses clearly reveal the fact that the petitioner herein, was actively involved in the forgery of the documents, which eventually resulted in the scam. The learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the Investigating Agency did not file any report before the jurisdictional Magistrate about the inclusion of the petitioner herein, as the 3rd accused. By referring to the relevant portion of the Final Report, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the additional 3rd respondent, submitted that the Investigating Agency has reported the exclusion of the person who was originally arraigned as the 3rd accused, since his whereabouts could not be traced out. It is further argued by the learned Public Prosecutor that, as per the information from the Investigating Agency, all the necessary reports have been filed before the Trial Court in connection with the inclusion of the accused in the charge sheet. Any way, the omission, if any, on the part of the Investigating Agency, in filing a report before the Trial Court about the inclusion of the petitioner herein, as the 3rd accused, cannot be taken as a reason to terminate the prosecution proceedings against him. This is especially so, in view of the fact that the Final Report and the accompanying records relied on by the Investigating Agency contained clear indications regarding the Crl.R.P No.1531 of 2016 5 involvement of the petitioner/3rd accused in the crime. The acceptability of the aforesaid evidence is to be decided by the learned Magistrate in the trial to be conducted in this case. It is not possible for this Court to sit on judgment over the probative value of the evidence garnered by the Investigating Agency, and to terminate the prosecution proceedings at the threshold. Needless to say that there is absolutely no sustainable grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/3rd accused, as prayed for in this petition. In the result, the petition is hereby dismissed. IAP Sd/- G.GIRISH JUDGE Crl.R.P No.1531 of 2016 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.R.P NO.1531/2016 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE I COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR, IN CRL.M.P 8335/2012 DATED 4.3.2015 ANNEXURE II COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.R.P NO.619/15 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT ANNEXURE III CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE FRAMED AGAINST THE PETITIONER DATED 4.3.15 ANNEXURE IV CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT ANNEXURE V CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ANNEXURE VI TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.7.2007 ANNEXURE VII TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.8.2015 IN CRL.RP 981/2015 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT