Allowed

Binoy Jacob v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Dec 2016Crl.MC/4248/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment deals with an application by an accused petitioner for the release of his passport to facilitate foreign travel. The High Court granted the release subject to conditions including execution of a bond and prior permission to leave the country.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to have his passport released for a period of six months to travel abroad upon executing a bond for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and complying with specific court conditions.

Binoy Jacob Vs the State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4248 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 381/2016 OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

BINOY JACOB S/O P.T.CHACKO, AGED 43 YEARS, VICE PRESIDENT, AISATS, 2ND FLOOR, JANVILLA BUILDING, JANVILLA LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR SRI.V.S.THOSHIN

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM THROUGH THE POLICE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RENJITH

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 4248 of 2016 ()

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' ---------------	ANNEXURES --------
ANNEXURE A THE	TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY PROCEEDING
ANNEXURE B THE 8/4/	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED 2016 IN WPC 4001/16
ANNEXURE C THE	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY L.S SHIBU
ANNEXURE D THE NO.8	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 15/3/16 BEARING /GL/DCB/21016/TC
ANNEXURE E THE	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.540/16
ANNEXURE F THE CRL. JUDG	FREE CARBON COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1/7/16 IN M.P NO.1700/16 IN CRL.M.C.540/16 BEFORE THE SESSIONS E, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
ANNEXURE G THE NO.3 STAT	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 19.9.2016 IN C.M.P. 119/2016 IN CRIME NO.1411/2016 OF MUSEUM POLICE ION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
ANNEXURE H THE NO.3 STAT	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 1.10.2016 IN C.M.P. 284/2016 IN CRIME NO.1502/2016 OF MUSEUM POLICE ION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
ANNEXURE I THE NO.4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 9.5.2016 IN CRL.M.P. 8/2016 IN CRIME NO.R.C.04(A)/2016/CBI/ACB/COCHIN

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

VPS PS TO JUDGE

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.M.C. No.4248 of 2016

¶24

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

¶25

Dated this the 13^th day of December, 2016

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

1.The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.381 of 2016 of Valiyathura Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 469 read with 34 of the IPC.

¶28

2.The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner, while he was working as the Vice President of AISATS, with intent to defame the de facto complainant, forged the signature of 17 lady staff of his company and submitted a false representation alleging that the de facto complainant had sexually assaulted them. The alleged false complaint was thereafter forwarded to the Air India authorities. Based on the aforesaid allegations, the crime was registered.

¶29

3.The petitioner moved an application for anticipatory bail before the court of Sessions which was allowed by

¶30

Crl.M.C.4248/2016 2

¶31

Annexure-E order dated 31.3.2016. One of the conditions required the petitioner to surrender his passport before the investigating officer.

¶32

4.In the course of proceedings, the petitioner filed an application seeking release of the passport. According to the petitioner, he is the Vice President of his Company and he has to frequently travel abroad for business purposes. The aforesaid application was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge by Annexure-F order, which is under challenge.

¶33

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterates the facts in the petition filed by him and prays that his passport be released and he be permitted to travel abroad. The learned Counsel highlighted the fact that the allegations are not grave and the petitioner being the Vice President of the AITSATS, a sister concern of Air India, there cannot be any apprehension that the petitioner would abscond.

¶34

Crl.M.C.4248/2016

¶35

¶36

6.The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner is involved in several other crimes, one of which involves an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to Annexure-I order of the Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram and contends that the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail in that case as well .

¶37

7.Considering the rival submissions and after going through the materials on record, I am of the considered view that the passport of the petitioner can be released to him for a period of six months months subject to appropriate conditions.

¶38

8.Resultantly, the passport of the petitioner shall be released and the petitioner shall be permitted to go abroad for a period of six months on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the

¶39

Crl.M.C.4248/2016

¶40

¶41

satisfaction of the court below. The grant of permission shall be subject to the following conditions:-

¶42

1.The petitioner shall file an undertaking before the Court below that he shall return back the passport within a period of six months from the date of release .

¶43

2.The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty five thousand) as security.

¶44

The petitioner shall not leave the country without obtaining prior permission from the Court below.

¶45

The amount deposited by the petitioner, by way of security will stand forfeited, in case he violates any of the conditions above.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE

¶48

vps

Binoy Jacob v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binoy Jacob v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazeem K.K. Vs State of Kerala

Saleesh K.S Vs Mara Pandiyas, I.A.S

Jayakumar Vs Mara Pandiyan

Ali Muhammed Vs State of Kerala

Bindhu John Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar C.K Vs T.P.Ibrahimkutty