Allowed

Mohammed Suhail.v v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Oct 2019Crl.MC/4777/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a fresh application for the interim custody of a B.Tech degree certificate held as evidence. It directed the lower court to dispose of the fresh application within two days and impose conditions for the certificate's return.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh application for release of certificate; Magistrate to decide within two weeks with conditions for return.

Mohammed Suhail.v Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 24TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN C.C.NO.41/2017 DATED 24-11-2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,KOZHIKODE

¶7

CRIME NO.200/2015 OF Kozhikode Town Police Station , Kozhikode

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

MOHAMMED SUHAIL.V AGED 28 YEARS PRISMS, THIRUVANNUR NADA P.O, KOZHIKODE-673 029

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SHARAN SHAHIER

¶11

RESPONDENT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM.

¶13

SRI C S HRITHWIK- SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F) 2

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The petitioner is one of the witnesses examined by the prosecution in the case C.C.No.41/2017 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kozhikode.

¶18

The offences alleged against the accused in the aforesaid case are punishable under Sections 484, 468, 471 and 406 r/w 34 IPC. According to the prosecution case, the accused had allegedly created fake documents using the B.Tech degree certificate issued to the petitioner herein. The petitioner was examined as PW4 in the case. His B.Tech degree certificate was marked as Ext.P3 during the trial of the case.

¶19

The petitioner filed an application as C.M.P.No.1702/2018 in the court below for releasing the degree certificate, which was marked as Ext.P3, to his interim custody. His plea was that he was in need of the certificate for getting a duplicate of it from the University as the original has become mutilated on account of affixing so many seals on it. As per Annexure-A8 order, the learned Magistrate dismissed the aforesaid application. The learned Magistrate found that the Assistant Director of the Forensic Science

¶20

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F) 3

¶21

Laboratory and the investigating officer in the case are to be examined for marking the report of the expert and that the original Ext.P3 document would be necessary for the disposal of the case. The learned Magistrate also observed that the petitioner is at liberty to obtain certified copy of Ext.P3 document for his use. The aforesaid order is challenged in the petition.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶23

This Court had called for a report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kozhikode with regard to the present stage of the case and the maximum time within which the case could be disposed of. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, in his report dated 11.10.2019, has stated that a rent agreement which had been released on kychit to a witness was not produced by that witness and that the aforesaid witness did not appear before the court on the date of hearing and a warrant has been issued against him and the case now stands posted to 12.12.2019. The learned Magistrate has also reported that CW.17 is the only remaining witness to be examined in the case.

¶24

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F) 4

¶25

Annexure-A8 order is dated 24.11.2018. Since then much water has flown under the bridge. It is categorically stated in the report of the learned Magistrate that CW.17 is the only remaining witness to be examined by the prosecution in the case. Therefore, it is evident that the other witnesses, including the investigating officer and the expert, have already been examined. The reasons stated by the learned Magistrate for dismissing the application of the petitioner no more survive.

¶26

The petitioner requires the original degree certificate for getting duplicate from the University. Considering the present stage of the case, there can be no objection to release the degree certificate to him. If at all the learned Magistrate requires the original certificate to be perused at the time of the disposal of the case, appropriate conditions can be imposed for return of the certificate by the petitioner at that time. In these circumstances, I find that the petitioner can be given the liberty to make a fresh application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate for release of the certificate to his interim custody.

¶27

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F) 5

¶28

Consequently, the petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner may file a fresh application for release of the degree certificate to his interim custody. If any such application is filed by the petitioner, learned Magistrate shall dispose of it within a period of two weeks from filing it. It is made clear that, if the learned Magistrate passes an order for release of the certificate to the petitioner, appropriate conditions can be imposed to ensure that the certificate would be re-submitted to the Court, as and when required by the Court, without making any alteration to it.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE

¶31

LEK

¶32

Crl.MC.No.4777 OF 2019(F) 6

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

ANNEXURE 1	A TRUE PETITIO GENIUS	COPY OF THE NER'S CERTIF ATTESTATIONS	ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE ICATES BEING RECEIVED BY .
ANNEXURE 2	A TRUE ISSUED	COPY OF THE ON 24.02.201	CERTIFICATE NO. 0443026 4.
ANNEXURE 3	A TRUE TOWN PO 200/201	COPY OF THE LICE STATION 5.	FIR REGISTERED BY THE , KOZHIKODE AS CRIME NO.
ANNEXURE 4	A TRUE 4361/20 PETITIO	COPY OF THE 15 IN CRIME NER.	APPLICATION CMP NO. 200/2015 MADE BY THE
ANNEXURE 5	A TRUE IN CMP	COPY OF THE NO. 3461/15.	ORDER DATED 24.08.2015
ANNEXURE 6	A TRUE EEIX-AS	COPY OF THE ST- 2/2015/P	LETTER NO. 68453/BT- B DATED 01.03.2016 .
ANNEXURE 7	A TRUE 41/2017	COPY OF CMP PREFERRED B	NO. 1702/2018 IN CC Y THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE 8	A TRUE IN CMP	COPY OF THE NO. 1702/201	ORDER DATED 24.11.2018 8

Mohammed Suhail.v v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Suhail.v 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aravind.B.T., Vs State of Kerala

Abhijith P.K., Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh, Vs State of Kerala

Alam Mohd.Shah Vs State of Kerala

Maneesh Vs State of Kerala

The Divisional Chief Executive Vs State of Kerala