The bench dismissed a bail application for modification of travel conditions. The court directed the petitioner to approach the competent lower court, noting that the bail order itself authorized such requests. No substantive relief was granted by this High Court.
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.
Crl.M.Appl/1/2021 IN Bail Appl. 5442/2016
1 / 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Present:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
Monday, the 8th day of March 2021/17th Phalguna, 1942 Crl.M.Appl.No.1/2021 IN Bail Appl.No.5442/2016
CRIME NO. 13/16 OF THE CYBER POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. For information purpose only
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.12
SAJEENA J, AGED 33/2016, D/O.SHARAHUDIN, TC 2/1343, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court be pleased to modify the conditions No.(b) & (g) and to direct to release the passport of the petitioner and allow her to travel abroad for the purpose her livelihood in the interest of justice.
This application coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and this Court's order dated 3/12/2019 in Crl.M.A.No.2/2019 and final order dated 3/8/2016 in BA.No.5442/2016 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR & V.S.THOSHIN, Advocates for the petitioner and the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court passed the following:
(P.T.O)
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
==================
Crl.M.A.No. 1/21 in B.A.No. 5442/2016 ================== Dated this the 8th day of March, 2021
O R D E R
Condition Nos.(b) and (g) of the bail order dated 03-08-2016 in For information purpose only B.A No.5442/2016 passed in the above Bail Application read as follows.
“b. The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdictional limits of the Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District during till the whole trial process is over unless otherwise permitted by the committal court or the trial court as the case may be in due course of trial for sufficient reasons.
xxx xxx xxx
g. The petitioners shall surrender their passport before the learned Magistrate or the Special Judge within five days from the date on which they are released. If any of the accused does not have passport, an affidavit shall be filed to the effect in court. If any of the conditions is violated, report shall promptly be made by the investigating Officer before the Special Court and prompt action including cancellation of bail on the ground of violation of conditions can be taken by the Special Court.”
Crl.MA 1/2021 in BA 5442/16 - : 2 :-
712] , Muhammed v. State of Kerala [2012 (4)KLT 655] , Muhammed Rafeek v. Union of India [2011(3) KLT 117] and further o rders in that regard may be duly passed by the said Court, within two weeks from the date of receipt of such application. For information purpose only
“....... to modify the condition No.(b) & (g) and to direct to release the passport of the petitioner and allow her to travel abroad for the purpose (sic) her livelihood in the interest of justice.”
Crl.MA 1/2021 in BA 5442/16 - : 3 :-
by the bail order rendered by this Court on 3.8.2016 in B.A.No.5442/2016 for making modification of condition No.b.
With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Application will stand disposed of. H/O.
sdk+
Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
/true copy/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court needs to clarify bail conditions regarding travel and passport surrender given existing orders.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Asok Kumar v. State of KeralaReferred¶23
Asok Kumar v. State of Kerala, [2009 (2) KLT 712]
Muhammed v. State of KeralaReferred¶23
Muhammed v. State of Kerala, [2012 (4) KLT 655]
Muhammed Rafeek v. Union of IndiaReferred¶23
Muhammed Rafeek v. Union of India, [2011(3) KLT 117]
SAJEENA J
THE STATE OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
