Kerala High Court
Jose.T.Paul vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2025
2025:KER:60084
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 687 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.11.2022 IN CRL.M.P.NO.533(B)/2018 IN C.C. NO.28
OF 2014 ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL
JUDGE (VIGILANCE), THRISSUR
REVISION PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2:
1 JOSE.T.PAUL
AGED 70 YEARS
(FORMER PRESIDENT OF CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR)
S/O KUNJIPPAVU, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE, CHOONDAL.P.O., THRISSUR,
PIN - 680502
2 C.C. SREEKUMAR
AGED 53 YEARS
(FORMER DEVELOPMENT STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, CHOONDAL
GRAMAPANCHAYAT) CHEMBANI HOUSE, PERUMANNU, KECHERY. P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680501
BY ADV SHRI.T.M.CHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE/RESPONDENT - COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
VIGILANCE AND ANTI- CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVAMBADI. P.O.,
THRISSUR., PIN - 680022
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
01.08.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.M.C.NO.2427/2024, THE COURT ON 11.08.2025
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 2427 OF 2024
CRIME NO.VC21/2010 OF VACB, THRISSUR, THRISSUR
IN C.C. NO.28 OF 2014 ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE ENQUIRY
COMMISSIONER& SPECIAL JUDGE, THRISSUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2:
1 JOSE.T.PAUL
AGED 70 YEARS
(FORMER PRESIDENT OF CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR)
S/O KUNJIPPAVU, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE, CHOONDAL.P.O., THRISSUR,
PIN - 680502
2 C.C. SREEKUMAR
AGED 53 YEARS
(FORMER DEVELOPMENT STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, CHOONDAL
GRAMAPANCHAYAT) CHEMBANI HOUSE, PERUMANNU, KECHERY. P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680501
BY ADVS.
SHRI.T.M.CHANDRAN
SRI.S.SUJITH
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTEND OF POLICE
VIGILENCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVAMBADI.
P.O.,THRISSUR, PIN - 680022
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.08.2025,
ALONG WITH CRL.REV.PET.NO.687/2024, THE COURT ON 11.08.2025 PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
3
COMMON ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2025
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 has been filed under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by accused
Nos.1 and 2 in C.C. No.28 of 2014 on the files of the Court of
the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur, arose
out of Crime No.VC-21/2010 of VACB, Thrissur, seeking
quashment of Annexure-XXIV charge sheet and Annexure-
XVII FIR in the above case.
2. Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024 has been filed under
Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. by the same petitioners,
challenging the order dated 08.11.2022 in Crl.M.P.
No.533(B)/2018, whereby the learned Special Judge
dismissed the discharge petition filed by the petitioners
under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. in the above case.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as
well as the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant
records and the impugned order.
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
4
4. The prosecution case is that, A1, A2 and A3 in the
F.I.R., the President of Choondal Gramapanchayat,
Gramapanchayat Member cum Development Standing
Committee Chairman and officiating as the Secretary of
Choondal Gramapanchayat, conspired together with the
intention to misappropriate the funds allotted under SGRY
project for the renovation work of Mazhuvanchery Puthur
road, Mekkad road, Akampadam road, Parannur Chira road
and Payyur Dominic road in Choondal Panchayat and making
forged documents including forged minutes of the
beneficiary committee, preparing the list of beneficiaries
containing fictitious persons as conveners, forging work
arrangement and using the forged documents before A3 to
obtain sanction from A3 for release of food grains as
mobilization advance for the work and lifted 46573 kilograms
of rice from Food Corporation of India, Thrissur, for the work
and misappropriated an amount of Rs.6,10,106.30, the sale
proceeds of rice parted for the work under SGRY programme
without executing the work causing pecuniary loss to the
Government. On this premise, the prosecution alleges
commission of offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c)
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
5
and (d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,
1988 [hereinafter referred as ‘P.C. Act‘ for short] and under
Sections 465, 471, 409 read with 120B of the Indian Penal
Code.
5. Crl.M.C. No.2435/2024 and Crl.Rev.Pet.
No.671/2024 also have been filed by the same petitioners
herein, out of which the 1st accused/1st petitioner is no more
and the 2nd accused/2nd petitioner alone pursues these
petitions.
6. While addressing similar allegations in connection
with renovation work of Chira parambu road in Choondal
Panchayat, where accused Nos.1 to 3 alleged to have lifted
18145 kilograms of rice, which was obtained by the 2 nd
petitioner by forging the signature of one Balan and further
alleged to have sold the rice in open market, without doing
the work, this Court in paragraph Nos.9 and 10 of the
common order dated 11.08.2025 in Crl.M.C. No.2435/2024
and Crl.Rev.Pet. No.671/2024, observed the manner in which
the 2nd accused has involvement in the said crime. In
paragraph Nos.9 to 15 of the above common order are
extracted hereunder for convenience.
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
6
9. But, as rightly pointed out by the learned
Public Prosecutor that, item No.7 of the report is pertaining
to this case, alleged to be put by the 2 nd petitioner as Q7,
Q8, Q16 and Q33, for which the opinion of the handwriting
expert is that the person who wrote the blue enclosed
standard writings and signature stamped and marked as
A1 to A12, S16 to S31 and S80 to S103 also wrote the red
enclosed questioned writings and signature similarly
stamped and marked Q7, Q8, Q16 and Q33. According to
the learned Public Prosecutor, in this case, the rice was
allotted to do the renovation work of Chira parambu road
in Choondal Panchayat. Even though, the rice was
collected and supplied by forging documents, no work
carried out and the rice were sold in open market and the
sale proceeds were misappropriated by the accused
including the 2nd petitioner. Thus, the allegations of the
prosecution are well made out prima facie, warranting
trial. Noting this aspect, the learned Special Judge
dismissed the discharge petition.
10. On perusal of the records, it could be noticed
that, the 1st accused Sri.Jose Paul T., who is now no more,
while he was working as the President of Choondal
Gramapanchayat and the 2nd accused, Sri.C.C.Sreekumar
(the 2nd petitioner herein), while working as the Member of
Choondal Gramapanchayat and Developing Standing
Committee Chairman along with accused Nos.3 and 4,
obtained sanction from the 3rd accused for the release of
rice as mobilization advanced for the work, lifted 18145
kilogram of rice from Food Corporation of India, Thrissur.
But, they failed to execute the work. Thereafter, they sold
the rice in open market and thereby, they misappropriated
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
7
Rs.2,37,699.50 and caused pecuniary loss of
Rs.2,37,699.50 to the Government. Even though, as
pointed out by the learned counsel for the 2 nd petitioner, in
Annexures-I to IV, the name of the 2nd petitioner is not
shown. Admittedly, the 2nd petitioner, while he was
working as the Developing Standing Committee Chairman
for the SGRY project, obtained sanction and got released
the rice. The prosecution allegation is that, the minutes,
the signatures in the agreement and relevant documents
were forged by the 2nd accused/2nd petitioner.
11. It is relevant to note that, as per Annexure-
XVIII FSL Report, when forgery alleged against the 2 nd
accused/2nd petitioner was further investigated by getting
his standard and admitted signatures in the minutes for
comparison with the questioned ones, the report is as
pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, supporting
the prosecution.
12. It is true that, in Anoop’s case (supra), this
Court while dealing with a case involving offences under
Section 498(A) as well as Section 405 of IPC, discussed the
ingredients for the said offences and held that in order to
succeed prosecution for the said offences, the ingredients
to be alleged specifically. In fact, in the said decision, the
offence under Section 120B of IPC was not involved and in
cases involving the offence under Section 120B of IPC,
when there is materials prima facie to show some meeting
of mind as part of conspiracy, individual role of the
accused need not be alleged or proved specifically.
Therefore, the ratio in Anoop’s case (supra) has no
application in the present case.
13. According to the learned counsel for the 2nd
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
8
petitioner, the 2nd petitioner’s role is not established in this
case. But, he has no definite answer why the FSL report
would say that alleged forged minutes of the beneficiary
committee and preparation of fictitious list of conveners,
work agreements etc. are in the handwriting of the 2 nd
petitioner, as reported by the FSL.
14. Summarizing the discussion, it could be
gathered from the prosecution records that, 18145
kilograms of rice were released from the Food Corporation
of India, Thrissur, by forging signature of one Balan and
also after forging signatures in the minutes for the same,
including fictitious persons as beneficiaries. The FSL report
as discussed herein above would go to show that the
forged handwriting and signatures are that of the 2 nd
accused. Thus, in the instant case, involving
misappropriation of 18145 kilograms of rice meant for
supply to the workers engaged in renovation work of Chira
Parambu road in Choondal Panchayat by the accused
herein, the 2nd accused/2nd petitioner is having an active
role, prima facie. In such a case, quashment as well as the
interference in the impugned order sought for by the 2 nd
accused/2nd petitioner could not succeed as the
prosecution material warrants trial of the accused, after
framing charge. In view of the above discussion, these
petitions deserve dismissal.
15. Accordingly, these petitions stand dismissed.
6. Coming to the facts of these cases, it could be
gathered from the prosecution records that, 46573 kilograms
of rice were released from the Food Corporation of India,
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
9
Thrissur, by forging signatures in the minutes for the same,
including fictitious persons as beneficiaries. The FSL report
as discussed herein above would go to show that the forged
handwriting and signatures are that of the 2nd accused. In
such a case, it could not be held that the role of the 2 nd
accused/2nd petitioner is not established, merely based on
the argument raised by the learned counsel for the 2 nd
petitioner that, in the 164 statements of the witnesses,
nothing stated as to the involvement of 2 nd accused/2nd
petitioner in this case.
7. Therefore, merely based on conjunctions and
surmises, the quashment and interference of the impugned
order sought for by the 2nd petitioner could not be granted,
since the prosecution materials would show that the
allegations against the 2nd accused/2nd petitioner are made
out, prima facie and the same would warrant trial of the
accused, after framing charge. In view of the above
discussion, these petitions deserve dismissal.
8. Accordingly, these petitions stand dismissed.
The interim order stands vacated. Since the case
is of the year 2014, the Special Court is directed to expedite
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
10
the trial and finish the same, at any rate, within a period of
four months from the date of receipt of copy of the order and
report compliance.
Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order
to the Special Court, forthwith, for information and
compliance.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
SK
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
11
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2427/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO.B.2835/04 OF
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DATED 20-10-2004
Annexure II A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 08-11-2004
ENTERED INTO BETWEEN SRI P.A.BALAN, CONVENER
OF THE BENEFICIARY COMMITTEE AND THE SECRETARY
OF CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure III A TRUE COPY OF A KARAR UDAMBADY EXECUTED BY
SRI P.A.BALAN ON 08-11.2004 IN FAVOUR OF THE
SECRETARY , CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure IV A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
DATED 08-11-2004 EXECUTED BY THE SAME CONVENER
SRI. BALAN IN FAVOUR THE SECRETARY, CHOONDAL
GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure V A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AUTHORISATION LETTER
DATED 12-11-2004 ISSUED BY THE PROJECT
OFFICER, DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ,
TRICHUR IN FAVOUR THE SECRETARY CHOONDAL GRAMA
PANCHAYAT
Annexure VI A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEASE ORDER DATED
27-04-2005 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT MANAGER,
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA IN FAVOUR OF THE
SECRETARY CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure VII A TRUE COPY OF AUTHORIZATION LETTER DATED 27-
04-2005 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY CHOONDAL GRAMA
PANCHAYAT IN FAVOUR OF P.A.BALAN THE CONVENER
OF THE COMMITTEE
Annexure VIII A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF AUTHORIZATION LETTER DATED
12-11-2004 ISSUED BY THE PROJECT OFFICER,
DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY IN FAVOUR OF
SECRETARY, CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure IX A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEASE ORDER DATED 27-04-
2005 ISSUED BY ASSISTANT MANAGER, FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA, TRIVANDRUM IN FAVOUR OF
THE SECRETARY, CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure X A TRUE COPY OF AUTHORIZATION LETTER DATED 27-
04-2005 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, CHOONDAL
GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Annexure XI A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 16- 02-2011
ISSUED BY THE AREA MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION
OF INDIA, DISTRICT OFFICE, TRICHUR TO THE
RESPONDENT NO.2
Annexure XII A TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY DHANESH MATHEW
RETURNING THE VALUE OF FOOD GRAINS AND THE
REASON FOR NOT COMPLETING THE PROJECT SERVED
ON THE SECRETARY ON 14-05- 2008
Annexure XIII A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY ACHUTHAN
RETURNING THE VALUE OF FOOD GRAINS AND THE
REASON FOR NOT COMPLETING THE PROJECT SERVED
2025:KER:60084
Crl.M.C. No.2427 of 2024 and
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.687 of 2024
12
ON THE SECRETARY CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT ON
14-05-2008
Annexure XIV A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 08-08-2008
ISSUED BY THE CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO
DHANESH MATHEW FOR REMITTANCE OF RS 281249/-
Annexure XV A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DATED 08-08-2008
ISSUED BY THE CHOONDAL GRAMS PANCHAYAT TO
ACHUTHAN FOR REMITTANCE OF RS 82502/-
Annexure XVI A TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 08-08-2008 ISSUED
BY THE CHOONDAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN FAVOUR OF
ACHUTHAN FOR FOR REMITTANCE OF RS 37479/-
Annexure XVII A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
DATED 02-11-2010 PREPARED BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.2
Annexure XVIII A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 24-09-2012
ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL FORENSIC SCIENCE
LABORATORY
Annexure XIX A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 28-05-2011
GIVEN BY ONE SIVADASAN U/S 164 OF CRL. P.C.
BEFORE THE JFCM COURT III, THRISSUR
Annexure XX A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 28-05-2011
GIVEN BY ONE JAMES U/S 164 OF CRL. P.C.BEFORE
THE JFCM COURT III, THRISSUR
Annexure XXI A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 27-05-2011
GIVEN BY ONE DHANESH MATHEW U/S 164 OF CRL.
P.C. BEFORE THE JFCM COURT III, THRISSUR
Annexure XXII A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 27-05-2011
GIVEN BY ONE ACHUTHAN U/S 164 OF CRL. P.C.
BEFORE JFCM COURT III, THRISSUR
Annexure XXIII A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 28-05- 2011
GIVEN BY ONE DOMINIC U/S 164 OF CRL. P.C.
BEFORE THE JFCM COURT III, THRISSUR
Annexure XXIV A TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 26-05-
2014 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE THE
COURT OF ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER & SPECIAL JUDGE,
THRISSUR AGAINST THE PETITIONERS TAKEN AS C C
NO.28/2014