Allowed

Anish Babu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Sept 2022Crl.MC/2871/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition, allowing the petitioner to recover the Rs.5,00,000/- deposit forfeited by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, reasoning that the forfeiture condition was specific to the passport release order lapse and not an additional bail security after compliance.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order releasing the deposit injunction is set aside and the Chief Judicial Magistrate is directed to release the amount upon applicant's application.

Anish Babu Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 11TH BHADRA, 1944

¶4

CRL.MC NO. 2871 OF 2022

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN C.M.P.No.9042/2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL

¶6

MAGISTRATE ,KOLLAM

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

ANISH BABU AGED 32 YEARS VAZHAVILA VEEDU, AMBALAKKARA P.O., VALAKOM VILLAGE, UMMANOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, PIN - 691532 BY ADVS. LIJU.V.STEPHEN INDU SUSAN JACOB

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

ADV. C. S. HRITHWIK - PP

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.M.C.No.2871 of 2022

¶15

¶16

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J

¶17

….........................................

¶18

Crl.M.C.No. 2871 of 2022

¶19

…................................................................ Dated this the 2^nd day of September, 2022

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.828/2018 of Kollam East Police Station. The aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioner and other accused for the offences punishable under sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC.

¶22

The petitioner was released on bail as per Annexure A1 order subject to certain conditions. One of the conditions was to surrender the passport before the trial court and in compliance with the said condition, he had surrendered the passport before the court. Later he filed Crl.M.C.No.5077/2018 for release after said passport and as per Annexure A2 order passed by this Court, the permission was granted to release the passport in his favour, subject to the condition that he shall deposit an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) before the trial court.

¶23

Crl.M.C.No.2871 of 2022

¶24

¶25

It was also observed in Annexure A2 order that

¶26

the aforesaid amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) shall stand forfeited if he fails to comply with any directions in the said order or in the bail order. The permission granted by the court in the said order was for a period of 45 days from 01.11.2018. Later the petitioner deposited the aforesaid amount, got the passport back and went abroad. Within the time stipulated by this Court, the petitioner returned to India and surrendered the passport. Later, C.M.P. No. 9042/2018 was submitted by the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam, seeking the release of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) which is under deposit in compliance with Annexure A2. But the said prayer was rejected as per Annexure A3. This Crl.M.C. is filed challenging the aforesaid order.

¶27

Heard Sri.Liju V. Stephen, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S. Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶28

I have considered the rival contentions and the

¶29

materials placed on record. It is discernible from the Annexure A3 order that the only reason stated by the

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.2871 of 2022

¶31

¶32

learned Magistrate is that the deposit is made towards additional security for the compliance of the said order dated 24.10.2018 and also for compliance of the conditions in the bail order.

¶33

However, the crucial aspect to be noticed in this regard is that the deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) was insisted by this court as per Annexure A2 order, for the purpose of the release of the passport to enable him to go abroad for a period of 45 days. The said deposit was therefore to ensure that he returns to India within the period stipulated in the said order, and surrenders the passport within time.

¶34

Now it is evident from the records that, he complied with the said condition by surrendering the passport within the said time. Therefore, since he had fulfilled the condition imposed by this court as per Annexure A2, he is entitled to the release of the said amount. It is true that, in the said order, forfeiture of the said amount was contemplated, if he violated the conditions of bail as well. However, it is evident that, the aforesaid condition was intended to ensure that the petitioner

¶35

Crl.M.C.No.2871 of 2022

¶36

¶37

complies with the bail conditions while he goes abroad on the basis of the Annexure 2 order and the said condition was to be in operation only for the period mentioned in the said order. Under no circumstances the said condition can be interpreted as an additional condition for the bail. Therefore, I do not find any justifiable reason for denying the said relief, and thus, interference is required.

¶38

In such circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure A3 order is set aside. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kollam, shall pass appropriate orders for releasing the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) deposited by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible upon a formal application being submitted by the petitioner in this regard.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., JUDGE

¶41

SSS

¶42

Crl.M.C.No.2871 of 2022

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2871/2022

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-6-2018 IN B.A. NO. 4037/2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24-10-2018 IN CRL. MC NO. 5077/2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11-12-2018 IN C.M.P. NO. 9042/2018 IN KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION CRIME NO. 828/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM

Anish Babu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anish Babu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rayees, Vs Remeshan

Vijaya Raghavan, Vs the State of Kerala

Shobin John Vs State of Kerala

Krishnan M Nair Vs State of Kerala

Salim Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf Vs the State of Kerala