SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 2313

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
M.L. Lenish S/o Lambodaran - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Crl. Rev. Pet. Nos. 221, 235, 1113 of 2024
Decided On : 29-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : S. Sreekumar, P. Martin Jose, P. Prijith, Thomas P. Kuruvilla, R. Githesh, Ajay Ben Jose, Sachin Jacob Ambat, Manjunath Menon, Anna Linda Eden, Harikrishnan S.
For the Respondents: Rajesh A., Rekha S.

The court affirmed that forgery and conspiracy were established, warranting trial against the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC provisions.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1)(c) and (d), 13(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 468, 471, and 120B - Allegations of encroachment on government land and forgery of documents by accused in conspiracy - The court found sufficient evidence of forgery and conspiracy, dismissing discharge petitions of accused Nos.1, 3, and 9, while setting aside the discharge of the 6th accused, directing him to face trial. (Paras 17, 19)

(B) Criminal Conspiracy - Essential ingredients - Agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act - Existence of conspiracy can be inferred from circumstances and conduct of accused. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
The accused were charged with encroaching upon government land and creating forged documents for illegal gain, with specific roles attributed to each accused in the conspiracy. The prosecution presented evidence of forgery and the use of false documents to claim ownership of the land.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the allegations of forgery were substantiated by forensic evidence, and the actions of the accused constituted a criminal conspiracy under the relevant laws.

Issues: The main issues included whether the discharge of the 6th accused was justified and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to link the accused to the charges of forgery and conspiracy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, warranting their trial, and that the discharge of the 6th accused was unsustainable due to the evidence presented.

Result: Crl.R.P.Nos.221/2024 and 235/2024 stand dismissed; Crl.R.P.No.1113/2024 is allowed, setting aside the discharge of the 6th accused.

ORDER :

1. Criminal Revision Petition No.221/2024 has been filed by accused Nos.1 and 9 in C.C.No.93/2016 on the files of the Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the PC Act’ for short), Muvattupuzha, challenging order in CMP No.766/2019 dated 16.11.2023 whereby the plea of discharge at their instance was negatived by the Special Court.

2. The 3rd accused in the above case, who had also filed CMP No.1145/2022 seeking discharge, filed Crl.R.P.No.235/2024, wherein his plea of discharge also was dismissed by the Special Court. By the same common order, the learned Special Judge allowed CMP No.835/2022 filed by the 6th accused and discharged the 6th accused. The prosecution has filed Crl.R.P.No.1113/2024, challenging the said discharge as illegal.

3. Heard the respective learned counsel for accused Nos.1, 3 and 9 as well as the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, and the learned counsel for the 6th accused, who is the respondent in Crl.R.P.No.1113/2024 in detail. Perused the relevant documents.

4. The prosecution allegation as stated in paragraph No.16 of the final report is as under:

“That M.L.Lenish (A1), Age 30/12, S/o.Lambodharan Mundakal House, Pottankadu, Baison Valley (private person), N.N.Radhakrishnan Nair (A2), age 61/12, Naduviladathu House, (Lakshmi Nivas), Chalamkodukara, Muthalakkodam, Idukki Dist. (Former village Asst.Chinnakkanal village), P Gopinatha Pillai (A3) Age 60/12, S/o.Parameswaran Pillai, Aswathi Bhavanam, Pampumukku, Thookupalam, Nedukandam, Idukki Dist. (Formerly Thahsildar Devikulam), M.G.Sabu (A4) Age 46/12, S/o.Gopinathapillai, Mookallayil House, (Chaithram House), Chirakadavu Kottayam, (Formerly Village officer, Chinnakkannal Village, T.R.Prasad (A5), Age 47/12, S/o.Ramakrishnan Nair, Thaiparambil House, Poopara Estate, Idukki Dist (Formerly village Asst.Chinnakanal Village), Jaimon (A6), Age 33/12, S/o.Rajappan, Narivelil House, Baison Valley, Idukki Dist. (Document writer License No.140 and ISA 388), Biju N.B. (A7), Age 41/12, S/o.Balakrishnan, Nirapel House, Baisonvalley, Konnathady, Idukki Dist. (Asst.Document Writer), Biju V.V. (A8), Age 37/12, S/o.Velayudhan, Venooparampil House, Muttukadu, Idukki Dist. (Asst.Document writer, License No.SAP 561) and M.M.Lambodharan (A9), Age 68/12, S/o.Madhavan Mundakkal House, 20 Acre, Pottankadu, Baisonvalley, Idukki Dist. (Private person and father of A1) and among the above accused, A1 and A9 were encroached 3.77 Acre Govt.land in survey No.148/1 of Venadu thavalam in Chinnakanal Village and forged a bogus patta vide L.A.24/68 in the name of Kurian Mathew (W11), as if, it was issued from LA office Adimali and entered into criminal conspiracy with A2, A6 to A8 and in furtherance of it, A6 falsely prepared the document No.291/06 dtd.08.02.2006 as if the land is in Chinnakkanal Thavalam in Sy.No.20/1, A7 and A8 falsely identified somebody as K.M.Kurian Mathew (W11) and registered it at Sub Registrar Office, Rajakumari in favor of A1 and subsequently A2 effected the pokkuvaravu vide PV 93/05-06 on 14.02.06 by forging the PV register of Chinnakanal Village and assigned false TP No.3921 in favour of A1 by falsely showing that the land was transferred fron TP 870, which was not in existence. Then A1 sold a portion of the said land to W3 and W22 by using forged records as genuine. Thereafter A1 and A9 entered in to criminal conspiracy with A3, A4 and A5 in furtherance of this conspiracy, A3 furnished false report to Dist.Collector, Idukki as the land is patta land of W11 instead of Govt.land and issued possession and non attachment certificate to A1. A5 prepared the false sketches and certificates to the Govt.land as if the land is patta land and A4 signed and issued it to W3 and W22 on 06.02.2007 and 07.04.2007 respectively and thereby the accused A2 to A5 abused their official position as public servants and committed criminal misconduct and obtained pecuniary ad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top