O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1895/2020 of Marayamuttam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. Alleging commission of offences under Section 419, 468 and 470 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12(b) of the Passport Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he applied for and obtained a passport in the name of one Mr. Manu Madhuppan and used the same for the period from 2003 to 2019. This was at a time when he had already been issued with a passport dated 24.08.2001 in his own name.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the passport was obtained by an agent entrusted by the petitioner for obtaining a passport. It is submitted that at any rate the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this matter.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is pointed out that for the period from 2003 to 2019, the petitioner used a passport issued in the name of one Mr. Manu Madhuppan, who is either a fictitious person or a real person in whose name the petitioner managed to obtain a passport. It is submitted that the said passport was obtained at a time, when the petitioner had already been issued with another passport on 24.08.2001. It is submitted that the petitioner is guilty of a very serious offence and that he had clearly manipulated documents to enable him to get a passport in the name of one Mr. Manu Madhuppan. It is submitted that on the petitioner is own showing his actual name is Aneesh K. V. and not Manu Madhuppan. It is submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely essential in the matter.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account of the serious nature of the allegations against the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation and shall not be permitted to leave India without the permission from the Jurisdictional Magistrate. I am inclined to grant bail, taking into consideration the fact that since all the offences registered against the petitioner are offences involving punishment of less than 7 years. The principles in Arunesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [2014 (3) KLT 143] squarely apply.

7. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in crime No.1895/2020 of Marayamuttam Police Station subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in crime No.1895/2020 of Marayamuttam Police Station at 9 a.m. For the period from 21.02.2022 till 28.02.2022 and thereafter whenever called upon to do so;

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his current passport along with an affidavit stating that the petitioner has not applied for or obtained any other passport. The petitioner shall not leave India without permission from the Jurisdictional Court.

(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in crime No.1895/2020 of Marayamuttam Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.