The Court rejected an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. because the petitioner was abroad and failed to produce the original passport, rendering the application inentertainable under the established requirement of territorial presence.
The bail application was rejected; liberty granted to approach the Court after returning to India.
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 P.UBAID
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/27TH SRAVANA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 4502 of 2016
CRIME NO. 561/2013 OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
PRAVEEN, S/O.SASI, AGED 32 YEARS, STAR HOUSE, PUTHUVEL DESOM, KADINAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SMT.BREJITHA UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT:
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA. R.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
P.UBAID, J.
============================ B.A.No.4502 of 2016 ============================ Dated this the 18th day of August, 2016
ORDER
The petitioner herein seeks pre-arrest bail under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest in Crime No.561 of 2013 of the Kadinamkulam Police Station, registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. When the Court asked the learned Public Prosecutor why the police did not arrest the petitioner for the last three years, it was answered that the petitioner absconded and went abroad after the incident, and that even now he is abroad. There is police report that the petitioner is even now abroad. In view of such a report, I passed an order on 05.08.2016 that the petitioner will have to produce documents to show that he is now in India, and that if he is abroad, this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained. Now the learned counsel has produced a copy of the petitioner's passport. That the original passport is not
2
B.A.No.4502 of 2016
produced in Court, shows that the petitioner is now abroad. In such a situation, the request under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
cannot be entertained. This application is accordingly rejected, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to
approach the Court after coming to India.
P.UBAID, JUDGE
rkj
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be entertained when the petitioner is abroad and fails to produce the original passport.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant bail to a petitioner who is physically outside the jurisdiction of the court.
Whether the petitioner absconded and is currently residing abroad as alleged by the prosecution.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
PRAVEEN
THE STATE OF KERALA
P. UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
