High Court Kerala High Court

Farhan vs State Of Kerala on 24 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
Farhan vs State Of Kerala on 24 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 89 of 2011()


1. FARHAN, S/O.ASARAF, AGED 19 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH

 Dated :24/01/2011

 O R D E R
                   THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

                 ----------------------------------------

                     Crl.M.C.No.89 of 2011

                  ---------------------------------------

              Dated this 24th day of January, 2011

                               ORDER

Petitioner is accused in Crime No.300 of 2010 of Valayam

Police Station, Kozhikode for offences punishable under

Secs.143, 145, 147, 148, 448 and 427 r/w Sec.149 of the Indian

Penal Code and Secs.3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

Learned Sessions Judge, Kozhikode granted bail to the petitioner

on 03.11.2010 subject to certain conditions including that

petitioner shall surrender his passport. He complied with that

condition. It is stated that petitioner got an employment abroad.

Petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.3561 of 2010 before the learned

Sessions Judge for release of the passport. That petition was

dismissed by order dated 29.12.2010. The said order is under

challenge. Learned counsel submitted that if the passport is not

issued to the petitioner he will loose his job. I have heard learned

Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting

instructions submitted that other accused are absconding and

that investigation is not complete. Presence of petitioner is

required for further investigation. The Investigating officer has

also the apprehension that if his passport is released and

Crl.M.C.No.89 of 2011
-: 2 :-

petitioner goes abroad he might not come back. Learned counsel

requested that passport may be released to the petitioner atleast

for a short period.

2. It is seen that serious offences are alleged against

petitioner and that investigation of the case is not complete.

Petitioner was granted bail only on 03.11.2010 and as directed by

the learned Sessions Judge petitioner surrendered his passport.

The request for release of the passport cannot be entertained in

the above circumstances. In the circumstances, I do not find

reason to interfere with the order under challenge but, I make it

clear that this order or the impugned order will not stand in the

way petitioner approaching the learned Sessions Judge with a

similar request at a later stage if circumstances justified that.

This criminal miscellaneous case is dismissed.

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)

Sbna/-