High Court Kerala High Court

Naseer Kolappala vs State Of Kerala on 26 May, 2009

Kerala High Court
Naseer Kolappala vs State Of Kerala on 26 May, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1633 of 2009()


1. NASEER KOLAPPALA, S/O. MOHAMMED,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :26/05/2009

 O R D E R
            M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
          ===========================
        CRL.M.C.No.1633 &1641 OF 2009
          ===========================

      Dated this the 26th day of May,2009

                     ORDER

Petitioner is the second accused in Crime

No.226/2006 of Medical College Police Station,

Kozhikode. The allegation is that he committed

offence under section 489B read with section 34

of Indian Penal Code along with other accused.

As per order dated 20.2.2009, this court

granted bail to the petitioner in bail

application 685/2009. One of the conditions

imposed was that he shall not leave the limits

of the Police Station within which the crime is

registered, except with the previous permission

of the Magistrate. Crl.M.C.1641/2009 is filed

to lift the said condition. The passport of

the petitioner was seized by the police during

investigation and was produced before the

learned Magistrate. Petitioner filed

Crl.M.C.1633 & 1641 of 2009 2

C.M.P.1095/2009 before Judicial First Class

Magistrate under section 451 of Code of Criminal

Procedure to release the passport contending that

he is working in Qatar and if he fails to report

at Qatar before 30.5.2009 his visa will expire and

he will loose the employment therein and therefore

the passport is to be released. The prosecutor

opposed the application contending that if the

passport is released, he will leave India and there

is every chance for repeating the crime. Learned

Magistrate dismissed the petition as per order

dated 11.5.2009 holding that considering the

seriousness of the offence and the submission of

the Prosecutor he is of the opinion that the

passport shall not be released to the petitioner at

this stage. Crl.M.C. 1633/2009 is filed to quash

that order and to grant interim custody of the

passport.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were

Crl.M.C.1633 & 1641 of 2009 3

heard.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submitted that unless the passport is

released the period of visa cannot be extended and

he would lose his entire business and the very life

and therefore in the interest of justice he is to

be permitted to leave India and to be away for two

months and for that limited purpose passport is to

be released. Learned counsel also submitted that

petitioner is prepared to give any security

including that of his close relatives and

unconditional undertaking to appear before the

court within two months from that date and

therefore his passport be released and the

condition while granting bail be lifted.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the

application submitting that if petitioner leaves

India, he may not return and there is every chance

for repeating the offence and therefore the

passport cannot be released.

Crl.M.C.1633 & 1641 of 2009 4

5. The order for bail granted by this court

does not contain a prohibition against leaving

India. It only contains the condition that

petitioner shall not leave the limits of the Police

Station, within which the crime is registered

except with the previous permission of the

Magistrate. Therefore petitioner is entitled to

seek permission of the Magistrate and leave India,

if it is permissible. Therefore I find no reason

to lift the condition in the bail order as sought

for. With liberty to the petitioner to move the

Magistrate for permission, Crl.M.C.1641/2009 is

disposed.

6. The case of the petitioner is that the

period of his visa will expire unless the passport

is released and petitioner could go over to Qatar

and if he fails, his entire business will be

ruined. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner

is prepared to give any security or guarantee

including that of his close relatives and will

Crl.M.C.1633 & 1641 of 2009 5

assure that he will appear within the time

stipulated by the Magistrate and therefore the

passport may be released.

7. In the light of this submission of the

petitioner that he is prepared to seek permission

of the Magistrate to leave India for a limited

purpose and he is prepared to give any security

and guarantee for his return within two months

learned Magistrate may consider the application to

leave India for the short period and to release the

passport for that purpose on getting sufficient

security and guarantee that he will return and

appear within the stipulated time.

Petitions are disposed accordingly.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
tpl/-

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

———————

W.P.(C).NO. /06

———————

JUDGMENT

SEPTEMBER,2006