Partly allowed

Anu P. Satheesan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Sept 2023Crl.MC/3162/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. No. 3162 of 2023 where the petitioner challenged the conditions imposed in the bail order. The High Court modified the condition allowing travel abroad for three years and deleted the requirement of depositing a sum of money, holding the deposit harsh and unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Condition permitting travel abroad modified to three years; condition to deposit Rs. 1,00,000 deleted.

Anu P. Satheesan Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 20TH BHADRA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3162 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-02-2023 IN CRMP 633/2023 IN CC 502/2017
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,ALATHUR

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

ANU P. SATHEESAN
AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. SATHEESAN ,
PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAITHAKODY , AYIROOR VILLAGE,
RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 689 614.

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

 M.T.SURESHKUMAR
 SREELAKSHMI SABU

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN – 682 031.

¶13

BY ADV SMT. SREEJA V (PP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC NO.3162 OF 2023 2

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the conditions imposed in Annexure-A4 order, as a result of which, the petitioner is able to obtain a passport having a short validity (one year) alone.

¶18

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.124/2017 of Mangalam Dam Police Station, Palakkad District, which is now pending as C.C.No.502/2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Alathur. The petitioner faces prosecution under Sections 406, 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The allegation against the petitioner and the other accused is that the petitioner along with the other accused had collected money from the defacto complainant, promising to obtain a job for the defacto complainant in a foreign country. It is the case of the petitioner that the role ascribed to the petitioner is that she had introduced the defacto complainant to the 1^st accused.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a nurse by profession and she has now

¶21

Crl.MC NO.3162 OF 2023 3

¶22

obtained an employment in Kuwait and the minimum period of validity of her passport must be three years in order to enable the petitioner to obtain a Visa. It is submitted that in such circumstances, the condition in Annexure-A4 order, permitting the petitioner to go abroad for a period of one year alone, may be modified and the petitioner may be permitted to go abroad atleast for three years. It is submitted with reference to Annexure-A7 communication issued by the Passport Officer, Trivandrum, that when permission is granted only for a period of one year, the passport validity will also be restricted to that period. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that condition No.2 in Annexure-A4 order to the extend it requires the petitioner deposits a sum of Rupees One Lakh in cash is too harsh and may not be imposed in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶23

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instruction, would submit that, according to the defacto complainant, the money demanded by the 1^st accused was transferred to the account of the petitioner herein. It is submitted that the only concern in permitting the petitioner to go abroad is that she may not be available to face trial. It is submitted that the trial of the case may take some time as the 1^st accused is absconding.

¶24

Crl.MC NO.3162 OF 2023 4

¶25

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that condition No.1 in Annexure-A4 order can be modified by permitting the petitioner to go abroad for a period of three years, in connection with her employment. This shall however be subject to the condition that the petitioner shall produce before the Trial Court her full address and contact details in the country of employment and shall also undertake to appear before the Court as and when summoned to do so. In Annexure-A4 requires the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, as part of the conditions for granting permission to go abroad. That condition, besides being harsh, may not be justified in law. Therefore, condition No.2 in Annexure-A4 order will stand deleted.

¶26

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶27

ats

¶28

Crl.MC NO.3162 OF 2023 5

¶29

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3162/2023

¶30

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES

¶31

`Annexure A1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NUMBER 124 OF 2017` `OF MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION DATED 10.2.2017`
`Annexure A2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 31/5/2017` `ALLEGING OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 406, 420 READ` `WITH 34 OF IPC`
`Annexure A3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION AS CMP NO. 633 OF 2023` `FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST` `CLASS MAGISTRATE -I, ALATHUR , DATED 15/2/2023`
`Annexure A4`	`CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23-2-2023 IN` `CRL.MP NO. 633 OF 2023 IN C C NO. 502 OF 2017 OF` `JFCM-I, ALATHUR`
`Annexure A5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT` `ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER FROM AL SALAM` `HOSPITAL CO. KUWAIT DATED 27/11/2022`
`Annexure A6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRONIC VISA ISSUED IN FAVOUR` `OF THE PETITIONER BY THE STATE OF KUWAIT WITH THE` `DATE OF EXPIRY 15/4/2023`
`Annexure A7`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PASSPORT` `OFFICER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 30.5.2023.`
`Annexure A8`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PASSPORT` `OF THE PETITIONER.`
`Annexure A9`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE` `MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS VIDE GSR 570(E) DATED` `25-8-1993 ISSUED UNDER S. 22 (A) OF THE PASSPORT` `ACT 1967.`

Anu P. Satheesan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anu P. Satheesan 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

Shinimol M.P Vs State of Kerala

Shinimol M.P Vs State of Kerala

Shinimol M.P Vs State of Kerala

Zeenath D.v.P, Vs Union of India

T.S. Sivanandan Vs the District Collector

Suresh Vs State of Kerala