The petitioner is the 5th accused in Crime No.76 of 2012 of THE Palode Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 167, 406, 420, 468 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12(b) of the passport act, apprehends arrest and has filed the application. 2. It is submitted that the de facto complainant applied for issue of passport through the first accused and gave the relevant documents. But when the passport was received, it was found that photograph of the third accused was affixed IN it. The first accused collected the passport from the de facto complainant FOR CORRECTION and gave it to the 6th accused, who in turn gave it to the petitioner herein. It is alleged that `25,000/- was collected by the first accused for the purpose and the petitioner also got a share of that.
3. The learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. There is no allegation that the petitioner is a party to the alleged forgery.
Bail Appl.No.3275 of 2014 () 2
4. I have gone through the reports submitted by the investigating officer and find that according to the prosecution the petitioner also had a role in the alleged forgery of the passport. The learned counsel has submitted that the accused 1, 2 and 6 are granted bail. But I find from the order that it was regular bail granted to them after they were interrogated by the police. In the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, request for pre-arrest bail cannot be allowed. But it is directed that in case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the day of arrest itself where it is open to the petitioner to move application for regular bail.
The application is disposed of with the above direction.
AMV Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE