Partly allowed

Kamarudeen v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Aug 2016Crl.MC/3813/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner, a sole accused in a grave IPC case at the committal stage, to hold his passport and travel abroad for one year. The court directed the Magistrate to release the passport subject to specific conditions, including a bond, security deposit, and notice requirements.

What did the court decide?

Passport released for one year subject to bond with sureties, Rs.50,000 security deposit, and strict conditions including surrender if trial starts.

Kamarudeen Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/14TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3813 of 2016 ()

¶6

CMP. 1528/2016 AND C.M.P. 1529/2016 IN CP 66/2016 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, VARKALA

¶7

---------

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

¶9

KAMARUDEEN, AGED 44 YEARS, K.V.HOUSE, KATTUVILA VEEDU, MANANAKKU, PERUMKULAM, KEEZHATTINGAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER

¶14

TRIVANDRUM, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, PASSPORT OFFICE, SNSM JUNCTION, KARALKADA JUNCTION, PETTAH P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE: 695 024.

¶15

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI. BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH,

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 3813 of 2016 ()

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

ANNEXURE-A:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.129/2015 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-B:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.05.2015 IN CMP NO.3163/2015 IN CRIME NO.129/2015 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, VARKALA.
ANNEXURE-C:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.07.2015 IN CRL.M.C.NO.4348 OF THIS HONORABLE COURT.
ANNEXURE-D:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PASSPORT OF PETITIONER
ANNEXURE-E:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION CMP NO.1528/2016 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, VARKALA.
ANNEXURE-F:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION CMP NO.1529/2016 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, VARKALA.
ANNEXURE-G:	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.04.2016 IN CRL.M.C.NO.2639/2016 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
ANNEXURE-H:	FREE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.05.2016 IN CMP NOS.1528/16 AND 1529/16 IN C.P.NO.66/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I VARKALA.
RESPONDENT(S)'	EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J

¶26

¶27

Crl.M.C. No. 3813 of 2016

¶28

- - - - Dated 5^th August, 2016

¶29

¶30

ORDER

¶31

1.The petitioner is the sole accused in C.P.No.66 of 2016 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of 1^st Class I, Varkala. He is proceeded against for having committed offences punishable under Sections 324, 333 and 326 of the IPC.

¶32

2.The application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to go abroad and also for permanent exemption was dismissed by the learned Magistrate by Annexure H order. The same is under challenge.

¶33

3.The learned counsel submits that on an earlier instance this court had as per Annexure C order had set aside the order of the learned Magistrate and had permitted the petitioner to seek renewal of his passport. The petitioner was also permitted to file appropriate application for travelling abroad after getting the passport renewed. The passport has since been renewed and the same is retained

¶34

Crl.M.C. No. 3813 of 2016 -2-

¶35

by the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner has secured a job abroad and and for that purpose had filed an application before the learned Magistrate. When expeditious orders were not passed, the petitioner had filed Crl.M.C. No 2639 of 2016 and the learned Magistrate was directed to pass expeditious orders. However the learned Magistrate rejected the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that the offence is grave. The reasons which persuaded the court below to dismiss the application are untenable according to the learned Counsel. He prays that stringent conditions be imposed and the pendency of the Criminal Proceeding by itself cannot be a reason to disallow his prayer.

¶36

4.Heard the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned Assistant Solicitor General for the 2^nd respondent.

¶37

5.It is borne out from the records that the case is now in the committal stage. It has been held by this Court in Fasar

¶38

Shaheen V State of Kerala ( 2009 KHC 4459), that it is

¶39

Crl.M.C. No. 3813 of 2016 -3-

¶40

not necessary to insist on the physical presence of the accused in court when the case is committed to the Court of Session. The trial in the said case is not likely to take place in the near future. It is also borne out from the records that the visa is due to expire on 5.8.2017. Though serious allegations are levelled against the petitioner in the final report, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to permit the petitioner to go abroad for a period of one year, subject to appropriate conditions.

¶41

6.The Judicial Magistrate of the I Class - I , Varkala is directed to release the passport No.F 2604318 to the petitioner on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/( Rupees Fifty Thousand Only ) with two solvent sureties for the like sum. It shall also be subject to the following conditions:-

¶42

1.The passport of the petitioner shall be released to him for a period of one year. The petitioner shall give an undertaking before the learned Magistrate that he will return the passport before the Court within a period of one year from the date of obtaining release of that particular document from Court.

¶43

Crl.M.C. No. 3813 of 2016

¶44

-4-

¶45

2.The petitioner shall leave his local address before the learned Magistrate. He shall also leave the name and other particulars including mobile phone number etc. of his local Advocate, who could be contacted by the Court for giving any direction to the petitioner.

¶46

3.The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/as security towards temporary release of the passport.

¶47

4.On compliance of the conditions as above , the learned Magistrate shall direct the 2^nd respondent to release the passport to the petitioner .

¶48

5.In case, the case is taken up for trial before the expiry of one year and the presence of the petitioner is felt necessary by the Court, he shall be bound to appear and surrender before the Court on intimation to his local Advocate.

¶49

6.The petitioner shall not leave the country without obtaining prior permission from the learned Magistrate.

¶50

7.The amount deposited by way of security will be liable to be forfeited in case he remains absent during the trial process, without any lawful excuse.

¶51

The petition is disposed off as above.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE

¶54

kp/-5.8.16

¶55

Crl.M.C. No. 3813 of 2016 -5-

¶56

The number of the passport shown as “F 2604318” in the 2^nd line of paragraph 6 at page 3 in the final order dated 05.08.2016 in Crl.M.C.No.3813/2016 is corrected and substituted as “N 1612694”, as per order dated 29.09.2016 in Crl.M.A.No.9954/2016 in Crl.M.C.No.3813/2016.

¶57

Sd/Registrar (Judicial)

Kamarudeen v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamarudeen 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.v.Rappai Vs State of Kerala

Jamsheer Vs State of Kerala

Nihal Vs State of Kerala

G.Asokan Vs State of Kerala

Raju Vs State of Kerala

Girijan Vs State of Kerala