Kerala High Court
Rajalekshmi @ Nisha vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2018
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018
CRMC 1111/2018 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM
CRIME NO.502/2018 OF PALLITHOTTAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 & 3:
1 RAJALEKSHMI @ NISHA,
AGED 43 YEARS,
D/O. PANKAJAKSHAN NAIR, 140A(8/188), ANNYDANAM -II,
CHERTHALA SOUTH P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 688552
2 GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER @ GOPAN,
AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O DAMODHARAN NAIR, VADAKKE THAYYIL VEEDU,
CHERTHALA SOUTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN-688552.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SRI.S.ABHILASH
SMT.S.SEETHA
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 31
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PALLITHOTTAM POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 006.
SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 2
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code" for brevity).
2. The petitioners herein are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.502 of 2018 of the Pallithottam Police Station. In the aforesaid Crime, they are accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 494, 498A and 323 r/w Section 34 IPC.
3. The prosecution allegation is that the 1 st accused in the aforesaid crime induced the de facto complainant to marry him by suppressing the fact that he was a married man. It is further alleged that the petitioners herein impersonated as the sister and brother-in-law of the 1st accused with intent to persuade her to marry the 1st accused. The accused are also alleged to have committed criminal breach of trust by misappropriating ₹ 49 lakhs and 40 sovereigns of gold.
4. The petitioners were granted an order of pre-arrest bail by the Court of Sessions by Annexure-1 order. There were, however, directed to surrender their respective passports before the investigating officer, who, in turn, was directed to produce the same before the Court having jurisdiction. In terms of the said direction, Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 3 the passports were surrendered by the petitioners.
5. They then approached the learned Sessions Judge and filed an application with a prayer to release the passports in order to enable them to go abroad and to join their family. They specifically contended that they are working abroad in an advertising company and their children are studying there. They undertook that they shall appear as and when directed and sought for appropriate orders.
6. The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order has dismissed the application accepting the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor that the passports are material evidence which would show that the petitioners had come down to India to deceive the de facto complainant. It was also held that if the passports are released, the petitioners would go abroad and delay the trial.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also considered the submissions advanced. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the learned Sessions Judge was not justified in dismissing the application of the petitioners. The petitioners were granted an order of pre-arrest bail by the Court of Sessions after appreciating the Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 4 facts and circumstances of the case and also the role assigned to them. In terms of the directions issued by the learned Sessions Judge, the petitioners had appeared before the investigating officer and had co-operated with the investigation. The final report has not been laid till date and in that view of the matter, depriving the petitioners of their means of livelihood does not appear to be justified. I am of the view that the interest of the prosecution is not likely to suffer, if the petitioners are permitted to go abroad for a period of one year by imposing appropriate conditions.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed and the learned Magistrate is directed to release the passports and grant permission to the petitioners to go abroad for a period of one year months on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court below. It shall also be subject to the following conditions:
1. The court below shall grant permission to the petitioners to go abroad for a period of one year.
The petitioners shall give an undertaking before the Court below that they will return their passports before the Court within a period of one year from the date of obtaining release of the passports from Court.
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 5
2. The petitioners shall submit true attested copies of their respective passport along with the VISA before the court below and also furnish their residential address abroad. They shall also leave the name and other particulars, including mobile phone number, email address etc. of themselves and their local Advocate, who could be contacted by the Court or Investigating officer for giving any direction to the petitioners.
3. If the presence of the petitioners is inevitable for any purpose, on intimation to the petitioners or to their lawyer, the petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
IAP //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN
CRL.M.C.NO.1111/2018 DATED 27.7.2018 ON THE FILE OF SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.
ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF PETITION IN CRL.M.P.NO.1112/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS FOR RETURN OF THEIR PASSPORT.
ANNEXURE 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P.NO.1112/2018 IN CRL.M.C.NO.1111/2018 DATED 2.11.2018 ON THE FILE OF SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.
RESPONDENTS'/S EXHIBITS:
NIL