SANY FRANCIS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused Nos. 1 and 3, in Crime No.473/2019/CBCUII/ EKM/R/2019 of Crime Branch Central Unit-II, Ernakulam for offences punishable under sections 406,420 and 120B of IPC and section 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, seek bail by preferring the above separate bail applications.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the first accused was the managing director of a construction company by name Holy Faith Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The second accused was the Secretary of the erstwhile Maradu Panchayath. The third accused was the junior superintendent of the above Panchayath and the fourth accused was the clerk in charge of concerned section dealing with the matters regarding the building permit of that Panchayath.

(3.) The allegation of the prosecution was that, the petitioners along with the 4th accused, with the dishonest intention of obtaining wrongful pecuniary advantage, had entered into a criminal conspiracy to procure a building permit for construction of a 19 storied apartment complex proposed by the builder, in Survey Nos.194/7.197/8,194/10 and 194/16 of 92.585 cents of land in the erstwhile Maradu Panchayath. The land fell within the Coastal Regulation Zone III, as per the CRZ Notification dated 19/2/1991. The first accused submitted an application in the year 2006 for building permit in relation to the apartment complex in the above property. According to the prosecution, the entire land fell within the Coastal Regulation Zone and a major part of it was wet land as per the basic tax register of the village. Pursuant to the criminal conspiracy entered into between the accused for obtaining the pecuniary advantage to the accused, the building permit application was accepted and the building permit was issued without considering the restrictions. On the strength of the illicit building permit, the first accused constructed the multi stored building and thereafter, the builder sold the flats to innocent buyers for exorbitant rate suppressing the fact that the building was constructed on land where construction was prohibited as per the CRZ notification and violating the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order 1967 and Kerala Building Rules. It was also alleged that the land was within an agricultural zone and as per the construction plan that came into effect on 1989, the land should not be utilised for construction of a building. It was further alleged that survey conducted later showed that the accused had encroached into 3.58 cents of puramboke.