Allowed

Th.S.Jeyapaul v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Jun 2015CRL OP(MD)/10172/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the Regional Passport Officer to return the petitioner's passport within one week to enable his travel to Sri Lanka for business, holding that no legal basis existed for its retention given the concluded investigation. The petitioner must return to India by August 1, 2015, to cooperate in the trial.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to Respondent No. 3 to return the petitioner's passport within one week for travel to Sri Lanka and surrender it upon return.

Th.S.Jeyapaul Vs the Inspector of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24.06.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10172 of 2015

¶7

S,Jeyapaul ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Melur,

¶10

Madurai District.

¶11

The Superintendent of Police,

¶12

Madurai District.

¶13

3.The Regional Passport Officer, Kotchadai, Madurai.

¶14

4.The Immigration Officer, Madurai Airport,

¶15

Madurai. ... Respondents

¶16

Vijayalakshmi ... Intervenor

¶17

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying a direction permitting the petitioner to visit Srilanka from 15.06.2015 to 14.07.2015 for the purpose of entering into contract with M/s.ETA-MELCO, Engineering (PTE) Limited, Srilanka for the purpose of installing and commissioning elevators and escalators and to issue necessary orders to the respondents 3 & 4 to return the petitioner's passport bearing No. L5474071 and to permit him to travel to Srilanka.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul

¶19

For Respondents 1& 2 : Mrs.S.Prabha Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶20

(*) For Respondents 3 & 4 : Mr.C.Rajaraman

¶21

Central Government Standing Counsel

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Intervenor : Mr.V.Sasikumar

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Seeking a direction to the third and fourth respondents to return the petitioner's passport and to permit him to travel to Srilanka, the petitioner has come up with this petition.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents 1 & 2, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 3 & 4 and also the learned counsel for the intervenor and perused the records carefully.

¶27

When the matter is taken up for hearing today the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a sum of rupees one lakh to the respondent counsel which is received by the respondent counsel.

¶28

Admittedly, the investigation is over, therefore the petitioner cannot be forced to stay here, since he wants to visit Srilanka for business purpose.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that there is no order to impound the passport. Even for impounding, a time limit has been fixed under the Passports Act,1967. In this case, admittedly, there is no impounding at all. Hence, this court is of the view that the passport will have to be returned to the petitioner.

¶30

Accordingly, a direction is issued to the third respondent to return the passport to the petitioner within a period of one week. The petitioner is at liberty to appear before the third respondent to get back the passport along with a copy of this order. After that the passport will have to be return to the petitioner.

¶31

The petitioner will have to report to the trial court for the next date of hearing after his return and co-operate for the trial. The permission given to the petitioner is only from 15.06.2015 restricted to 31.07.2015. He has to surrender the passport to the third respondent after returning from Srilanka and also the petitioner will have to be in India with effect from the first day of August i.e., on 01.08.2015 for the purpose of conduct of trial.

¶32

This criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

Assistant Registrar(Per.Admn)

¶35

(*) Corrected order to be issued

¶36

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ /True copy/

¶37

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶38

¶39

¶40

To be substituted for the order already despatched

¶41

The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Melur, Madurai District.

¶42

The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

¶43

The Regional Passport Officer, Kotchadai, Madurai.

¶44

The Immigration Officer, Madurai Airport, Madurai.

¶45

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶46

+1cc to Mr.C.Rajaraman,Advocate in Sr. NO.33378 +3 cc to Mr.A.Rahul, Advocate in SR NO.33330 +1cc to Mr.V.Sasi Kumar,Advocate in Sr NO.33692

¶47

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10172 of 2015 24.06.2015

¶48

RG.25.06.2015 3P/11C.

¶49

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Th.S.Jeyapaul v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Th.S.Jeyapaul v. the Inspector of Police

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

Asirvatham Vs the Inspector of Police

C.Shanthi Vs the Inspector of Police

Vellaiyan Vs the Inspector of Police

Muthukrishnan Vs the Superintendent of Police

S.Kannan Vs the Superintendent of Police

S. Ravi @ Ravichandran Vs the Commissioner of Police