High Court Kerala High Court

K.P.Abdul Rasheed vs Detective Inspector on 16 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.P.Abdul Rasheed vs Detective Inspector on 16 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1632 of 2008()


1. K.P.ABDUL RASHEED
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DETECTIVE INSPECTOR
                       ...       Respondent

2. KANNUR CRIME BRANCH

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.KHALID

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :16/06/2008

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J
                       ------------------------------------
                      Crl.M.C. No.1632 of 2008
                       -------------------------------------
               Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008

                                   ORDER

Petitioner is the 4th accused in a prosecution for offences

punishable, inter alia, under Section 465 I.P.C. The alleged crime

was registered in 1991. In 1993, final report/charge sheet was

filed. Altogether there were 4 accused persons. Trial was

conducted. The petitioner was not available for trial. Accused 1

to 3 stood trial. Accused No.2 was acquitted. Accused 1 and 3

were found guilty, convicted and sentenced. An appeal against

the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence imposed on Accused

1 to 3 is now pending, it is submitted. In the meantime, the

petitioner had approached the learned Sessions Judge for

anticipatory bail. He had produced two passports of his before

the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate granted him

anticipatory bail subject to conditions. The petitioner was

accordingly arrested and enlarged on bail. The petitioner applied

for return of the passports produced by him in the anticipatory

bail application. That application was also allowed. The

passports were returned to the petitioner. But there was a

Crl.M.C. No.1632 of 2008 2

direction that the petitioner must produce the passports and

report before the learned Magistrate on 18.06.08. By a later

order passed on 17.01.08, the petitioner was permitted to leave

for his place of employment abroad.

2. In terms of the orders, now the petitioner has to

appear before the learned Magistrate on 18.06.08. The matter

stands posted for trial to 18.06.08. According to the petitioner, he

is unable to appear now, but he undertakes that he shall appear

before the learned Magistrate within a period of one month from

18.06.08, if his presence is required by the learned Magistrate.

He had taken back his passports. He had gone to his place of his

employment abroad. He had deposited his passports with his

employer. The employer will not return to him the passports now

and he now wants one month’s further time to secure the

passports and produce the same before the learned Magistrate

and appear before the learned Magistrate. It is in these

circumstances that the present prayer is made for grant of one

month’s further time.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

even if the petitioner appears and the passports are surrendered,

trial cannot commence on 18.06.08 in as much as all the records

Crl.M.C. No.1632 of 2008 3

are not available before the learned Magistrate and are available

before the learned Sessions Judge in connection with the appeal

preferred by accused 1 and 3. In these circumstances, personal

appearance of the petitioner may not be insisted on 18.06.08. He

may be granted reasonable further time to produce the passports.

The learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar submits that

even if trial were to commence on 18.06.08, the petitioner shall

ensure that he is represented by a counsel. His personal

presence for trial may not be insisted if the learned counsel for

the petitioner is otherwise able to proceed with the trial, it is

prayed. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I find

merit in the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I

need only mention that if the trial cannot commence on 18.06.08

or if personal presence of the petitioner is not necessary for trial

on 18.06.08, coercive steps need not be taken against the

petitioner for his inability to appear and produce his passports on

18.06.08. I am satisfied that I can safely leave it to the learned

Magistrate to pass appropriate orders when the petitioner through

his counsel makes such a request on 18.06.08.

4. With the above observations this Crl.M.C is allowed in

part observing that the petitioner must appear before the learned

Crl.M.C. No.1632 of 2008 4

Magistrate through counsel on 18.06.08 and make appropriate

applications. The learned Magistrate must pass appropriate

orders on such application.

5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel

for the petitioner for immediate production before the learned

Magistrate.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-