ANIL P SREERANGAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 2nd accused in Crime No. 256 / CR / SI / 02, CB - CID, Thiruvananthapuram, has filed this petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dated 1st October, 2002 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram in C.M.P. No. 5574/02.

(2.) The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition may be stated as follows: Crime No. 256 / CR / SI / 02 / CB - CID was registered against the petitioner and three others alleging the commission of the offences punishable under S.466, 469, 471, 500 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that the accused in the case hatched a conspiracy to forge a document purporting to be the intelligence report of the Director General of Police (Intelligence) to the Private Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala. It is also alleged that on the strength of the forged intelligence report a news telecast was made in the news edition of Surya TV on 24.6.2002 at 6.30 p.m. and 11 p.m. The petitioner was arrested on 28.9.2002 and he was remanded to judicial custody. As he was suffering from some ailment, he was admitted in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. While he was undergoing treatment in the hospital, the investigating officer filed an application under S.167(2) of the Cr.P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram for remanding the petitioner to police custody. Though the application was stoutly opposed by the petitioner, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate allowed the application. The order is seriously challenged in this petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner strongly contended that the order of the court below is clearly illegal and cannot be sustained either in law or on facts. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner was interrogated on several days during investigation and the present attempt of the police is to further extract from the petitioner statements of their choice. He further contended that the impugned order is against the spirit of R.20 of the Criminal Rules of Practice.