Allowed

Jeevan Davis v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jul 2022Crl.MC/1896/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an order dismissing the accused's application for permission to travel abroad to UAE. Holding that the petitioner's presence was no longer necessary as the major investigation was complete, the Court directed the lower court to grant travel permission with appropriate conditions.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order and directed the Court below to grant permission to the petitioner to leave abroad with conditions deemed fit.

Jeevan Davis Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 1896 OF 2022

¶5

CRIME NO. 80/2022 OF KORATTY POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

JEEVAN DAVIS AGED 22 YEARS JEEVAN DAVIS, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. DAVIS. P.K CHAMAKKALA HOUSE, PUTHUSSERI, KORATTY, MURINGOOR ,VADAKKUMMURI ,TRISSUR DISTRICT680309, PIN - 680309 BY ADVS. K.RAJESWARY ANIL PRABHA.K

¶8

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA (KORATTY POLICE STATION) REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.KOCHI-682031 PIN - 682031

¶10

SRI P G MANU-SR PP

¶11

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

Crl. M.C. No. 1896 of 2022

¶13

..2..

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Annexure 2 order passed by the I^st Additional Sessions Court,

¶16

Thrissur (for short, “the Court below”) is under challenge in this Crl. M.C.

¶17

The petitioner is the accused. The offences alleged

¶18

against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 67B of the IT Act and Section 15(1) (2) of the POCSO Act. The petitioner was granted bail by the Court below on condition among other things that he shall not leave India without the permission of the Court.

¶19

The petitioner preferred Crl. M.P. No. 593/2022 seeking

¶20

permission to go abroad in order to rejoin his job at UAE. The said application was dismissed by the Court below, after hearing both sides as per the impugned order.

¶21

I have heard Smt. K Rajeswary, the learned counsel for

¶22

the petitioner and Sri. P.G. Manu, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

¶23

..3..

¶24

Crl. M.C. No. 1896 of 2022

¶25

5. The documents produced by the petitioner would show

¶26

that he is employed in UAE. The petitioner is aged 22 years. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if he doesn't rejoin the duty, he will lose his job.

¶27

The right to travel abroad and also the right to seek livelihood is a fundamental right. The Court cannot restrict a person from travelling abroad without any valid reason. Of course, restrictions can be placed while granting bail to ensure the presence of the petitioner during investigation and trial.

¶28

I have called for a report from the Investigating Officer, who filed a detailed report. The report would show that the major part of the investigation is over. The Investigating Agency awaits the report of the Forensic Examination. Apart from that, it is stated that the Investigating Agency has to collect the ownership certificate of the house where the offence was allegedly committed and also to get the CAF with IT Certificate of the mobile phone belonging to the petitioner. I am of the view that, for the said purpose, the presence of

¶29

Crl. M.C. No. 1896 of 2022

¶30

..4..

¶31

the petitioner is not necessary.

¶32

For the reasons stated above, Annexure-2 order passed by the Court below is set aside. The Court below is directed to grant permission to the petitioner to leave abroad on such condition as it deems fit to impose. The Court below is free to impose conditions to

¶33

ensure the presence of the petitioner as and when required during the investigation and also during the trial.

¶34

The Crl. M.C. is disposed of as above.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH,

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

RMV

¶39

Crl. M.C. No. 1896 of 2022

¶40

..5..

¶41

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1896/2022

¶42

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER IN CRL.M.C. NO. 62/2022 DATED 25/01/2022 Annexure2 THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P.593/2022 OF HONURABLE SESSIONS COURTS DATED 07/03/2022 Annexure3 TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER Annexure4 TRUE COPY OF THE EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATE WITH IDENTITY CARD FROM UAE

Jeevan Davis v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeevan Davis 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

Ujesh Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Rijeena A.K. Vs the State of Kerala

Dr.Rijeena A.K. Vs the State of Kerala

Dinil G Vs Station House Officer

Sainudheen, C.NO.3006 Vs State of Kerala

Ansha Razaq Vs Shafeena