SAFARULLA K. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is arrayed as the second accused in FIR No.VC 6/2015 of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Malappuram. Petitioner was working as the Junior Superintendent in the office of Regional Transport Office, Tirur. While so, on 23.08.2014, the second respondent conducted a surprise check in the office of the Joint Regional Transport Office, Tirur and recovered 15 numbers of blank driving licenses one license without lamination, 11 numbers of registration certificates from the possession of the 6 th accused, 15 numbers of blank registration certificates, driving licenses, permits, insurance certificates, tax tokens, fitness certificates, pollution certificates, transfer applications, registration certificates of several vehicles, transfer applications of different vehicles and the RC and permit of vehicles. A sum of Rs.26,570/- was found in the possession of the 7 th accused. Two security holograms and RC of the vehicle were found in the possession of the 8 th accused. A register with secret codes and the names of various motor driving schools and individuals were also found. Alleging that the motor vehicle agents were actively interfering and influencing the official matters of the joint RTO, Tirur and even possessing and handling security holograms, blank RC books and a driving license without lamination, for the purpose of forging valuable documents, the FIR was registered. Investigation is progressing.

(2.) As per the FIR, the petitioner stands arrayed as the second accused along with four other officers of the RTO Tirur and three private persons, who were motor vehicle agents. The prosecution is challenged by the petitioner contending that, he is absolutely innocent of the allegations and that he had been maintaining unblemished record of service. He was actually on leave on 23.08.2014 and consequently, he cannot be attributed with any of the illegalities allegedly committed in the office on that day. He cannot be held responsible for the possession of various items kept by the agents. It was also contended that, in spite of the lengthy investigation commencing from August 2014, no incriminating circumstance connecting the accused with the incident and the alleged malpractices could be unearthed till now and the delay in completion of investigation affects the career prospects of the petitioner. It was contended that, RC books and documents were delivered to the RTO office by C-DIT. 15 RC books which were found in possession of one of the accused were not supplied to the RTO, Tirur. Hence, petitioner cannot be held responsible for it.

(3.) Admittedly, several documents including security documents have been recovered from the possession of three private persons who are the motor vehicle agents. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was on leave on 23.08.2014 which is established by Annexure-A2 extract of the attendance register report dated 23.08.2014. Mahazar was prepared by the vigilance, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-A3. It shows that, 15 blank RC books, 2 holograms and one unlaminated RC book were recovered. Remaining RC books related to different vehicles. It is also true that, various blank forms were also recovered. Among the documents recovered, the blank RC books, unlaminated RC book and two holograms assume significance. They can be considered as crucial security documents, which can under no circumstance, be handed over by the officials of the concerned RTO office to private parties. Definitely, officers of the concerned RTO office are bound to account for it.