This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition challenges the High Court’s refusal to grant interim custody of a seized passport. The court held that retaining the passport for forensic analysis was justified as it was a material document.
Petition dismissed with directions to communicate the order to the court below.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/15TH JYAISHTA, 1936
CRL.MC.NO. 327 OF 2014 (E)
[CRL.M.P. NO.5346/13 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, MANJERI, CRIME NO. 671/2013 OF KARIPUR POLICE STATION,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT]
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VALIYA PEEDIYAKKAL SULAIKHA, W/O. SHOUKATH, VALIYA PEEDIYAKKAL HOUSE, KOORIPOYIL, KOORAD (P.O), MALAPPURAM DT., KERALA, PIN – 679 339.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, MALAPPURAM, DOWNHILL (P.O),MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 519.
3. THE ASSISTANT IMMIGRATION OFFICER, O/O ASST. FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGN.OFFICER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION (MHA) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, CALICUT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, CALICUT AIRPORT P.O, MALAPPURAM (DT) -673 647.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA, R2 & R3 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,A.S.G OF INDIA.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
CRL.M.C. NO.327/2014 – E:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NUMBER F0370735.
ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN 671 OF 2013 OF KARIPUR POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 2-11-2013. ANNEXURE D: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-12-2013 IN CRL. M.P. NO. 5346 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT MANJERI.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE R2.(A): TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT DTD. 08/11/2013. ANNEXURE R2.(B): TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 20/01/2014.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
K. Ramakrishnan, J.
==============================
Crl.M.C.No.327 of 2014
============================== Dated this, the 05th day of June, 2014.
O R D E R
This is an application filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manjery in Crl.M.P.No.5346/13 in Crime No.671/13 of Karipur Police Station under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
was traveling from abroad and reached Karipur airport, the Immigration Department found that the ECNR endorsement on the 30th page of the passport of the petitioner was found to be fake and on that basis, his passport was seized and Annexure
B crime was registered against the petitioner as Crime No.671/13 of Karipur Police Station under Section 420, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code and Section 12 (1) (b) of Indian Passport Act. He was also arrested and later released on bail. Thereafter, he filed Crl.M.P.5346/2013 for interim custody of the passport and the learned magistrate by the impugned order Annexure D dismissed the application which is being challenged by the petitioner by filing the petition.
Crl.M.C.No.327 of 2014 : 2 :
is no forgery and it is not known as to how much time it will take for the investigation to complete. So, there is no necessity to keep the passport till then. Further, she is also having a valid visa at the time when it was seized.
Crl.M.C.No.327 of 2014 : 3 :
The petitioner was also arrested and released on bail. It is also seen from the order that for the purpose of finding out whether it is forged document or not, the investigating agency wants to have the same examined by the Forensic Laboratory and steps have been taken for that purpose. Further, since it is a material document which is required for the ultimate decision of the case itself, the lower court was perfectly justified in not returning the passport to the petitioner at this stage as allowing the petitioner to travel again or use the same will amount to further offence and court should not be a party to the same. So, under the circumstances, this court did not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned magistrate in rejecting the application for interim custody of the passport and the present petition is without any merit, the
same is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the petition is dismissed. Communicate this order to the court below at the earliest.
Sd/-
K.Ramakrishnan, Judge.
Bb
[True copy]
P.A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court’s order refusing interim custody of a passport alleged to be forged pending forensic examination.
Whether the lower court was justified in retaining the passport as a material document in a forgery case.
5 provisions across 3 enactments
VALIYA PEEDIYAKKAL SULAIKHA
STATE OF KERALA
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, MALAPPURAM
ASSISTANT IMMIGRATION OFFICER, CALICUT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
KRAMAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
