Allowed

Sameer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Mar 2010Crl.MC/571/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an accused in a troublesome crime involving offences under Sections 143, 145, 147, 148, 353, and 149 IPC, approached the court via Section 482 CrPC to quash an order dismissing his request to lift the condition of surrendering his passport. The court allowed the petition, directing discharge of the passport upon execution of a bond and provision of address details.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Passport released on execution of bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties (one close relative) and furnishing of address in Gulf and counsel details.

Sameer Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 571 of 2010() -------------------------------------CRL.M.P.NO.264/2010 IN CRL.MC.1321/09 OF SESSIONS COURT,KOZHIKODE

¶5

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.4:

¶6

--------------------------------------------------

¶7

SAMEER, AGED 29 YEARS,S/O.POCKER, VATTORIMADATHIL, IRINGANNUR,VATAKARA TALUK.

¶8

BY ADV. MR.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT:

¶10

---------------------------------------------------

¶11

STATE OF KRALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. K.S. SIVAKUMAR

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Kss

¶15

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶16

CRL.M.C.NO.571 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 3^rd March 2010

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Petitioner is the fourth accused

¶19

in crime No.382/2009 of Nadapuram police

¶20

station registered for the offences under Sections 143, 145, 147, 148 and 353 read

¶21

with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. By Annexure-I order dated 23/10/2009 Sessions Judge, Kozhikode granted bail to the petitioner on conditions. Third condition was that he shall surrender his passport.

¶22

Petitioner surrendered his passport.

¶23

Subsequently he filed Annexure-II petition

¶24

before the Sessions court, to lift

¶25

condition No.3 on the ground that petitioner was working in Gulf and came to

¶26

India on 1/10/2009 and has to report for

¶27

¶28

Crmc 571/10

¶29

work in the first week of March 2010 and if he is not reporting, his employment visa will be cancelled. By Annexure-III order, learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition. This petition is filed under

¶30

Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-III order and to release the passport.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for

¶32

the petitioner and learned Public

¶33

Prosecutor were heard.

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that if the

¶35

passport is not released and petitioner is not permitted to leave India, he will loose his employment and the means of livelihood and in such circumstances, passport should have been released to the petitioner. It

¶36

¶37

Crmc 571/10

¶38

was also submitted that learned Magistrate has released passport of third accused surrender in compliance of the condition for granting bail.

¶39

Learned Public Prosecutor

¶40

submitted that if the passport is released, petitioner will not be available for trial and in such circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with Annexure-III order.

¶41

submitted. There is no case for the investigating officer that presence of the petitioner is necessary for further investigation. In such circumstances, if the passport surrendered by the petitioner is not released to him, it would result in

¶42

much hardship to the petitioner as he

¶43

¶44

Crmc 571/10

¶45

would loose employment in Gulf, which would

¶46

affect his livelihood. In such

¶47

circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to retain the passport further. What is to be assured is presence of the petitioner before the court for the purpose of trial. If that can be assured, I find no reason why the passport of the petitioner shall not be released.

¶48

Petition is allowed. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nadapuram is directed to release the passport of the petitioner to him on the following conditions. Petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum undertaking that petitioner shall appear before the court as and when required for the purpose of trial. At least

¶49

Crmc 571/10

¶50

¶51

one of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner like parents or sibling. If such near relative is not solvent to execute the bond, a bond is to be executed by such relative, in addition to the bonds to be exempted by the other two solvent sureties. Petitioner shall furnish his address and whereabouts in the Gulf, to the investigating officer before the passport is released and shall also furnish address of the counsel to whom investigating officer has to issue notice, for the appearance of the petitioner.

¶52

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

¶53

uj.

Sameer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Rafi Vs State of Kerala

Nizar Aziz Vs State of Kerala and Others

S.Ajith Vs State of Kerala

Sridharan Vs State of Kerala

Nishad M.S Vs the State of Kerala

B.K.Kunhikrishnan Vs State of Kerala and Another