Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Alex C. Joseph vs State Of Kerala Represented By The ... on 10 April, 2012

       

  

  

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT:

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

               TUESDAY,THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/22ND ASWINA, 1936

                                     Crl.MC.No. 491 of 2013 ()
                                        --------------------------
     CMP 1174/2012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ERNAKULAM
                       Crl.MC 1421/2012 of SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
  CRIME NO. 2228/2011 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
                                     ====================

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------

            ALEX C. JOSEPH, AGED 50 YEARS
            S/O.LATE JOSEPH, CHEKKATT VEEDU
            THADIYOOR DESOM, EZHUMATTOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA
            PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

            BY ADVS.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)
                          SRI.V.C.SARATH

RESPONDENT/STATE:
--------------------------------

            STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

            BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-10-2014, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C. NO.491/2013


                                 APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

ANNEXURE-A:         TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P.NO.619/2012 ON THE
                    FILE OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
                    MAGISTRATE - I, ERNAKULAM DATED 10.04.2012.

ANNEXURE-B:         TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P NO.1174/2012 OF THE
                    COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - I,
                    ERNAKULAM DATED 29.05.2012.

ANNEXURE-C:         TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.NO.1421 OF 2012
                    ON THE FILE OF THE SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED
                    13.08.2012


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

NIL



                           // TRUE COPY //        P.A. TO JUDGE



SD



                             P. UBAID, J.
                 ---------------------------------------
                      Crl.M.C. No. 491 Of 2013
                 ---------------------------------------
               Dated this the 14th day of October, 2014


                              O R D E R

The petitioner herein is the accused in crime No. 2228/2011 of the Palarivattom Police Station, registered under Sections 468 and 471 IPC and Section 12(b)(d) of the Indian Passport Act. Allegation against him is that he forged a passport to go abroad. It is really strange that this forged passport, seized by the police, was casually returned to the accused. It appears that arrest on the spot was also not made. Much later, he was arrested by the police and was granted bail by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam by order dated 14.03.2012 in C.M.P. No. 619/2012, on conditions. One of the conditions is that the accused shall not leave the State of Kerala without permission of the court, and the other condition is that he shall surrender his passport before the court. Report submitted by the police in this proceeding shows that the forged passport was in fact returned to the accused by the Sub Inspector without understanding the Crl.M.C.. No. 491/2013 2 seriousness of it, but now the passport is missing. In fact, the Sub Inspector who returned the passport will have to be dealt with, and appropriate action will have to be taken against him. Any way, the objectionable condition is that the accused shall not leave the State of Kerala. The said condition is sought to be set aside under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner approached the learned Magistrate, and he also approached the learned Sessions Judge under Section 439(1)(b) Cr.P.C., but the request was turned down.

2. On hearing both sides, I find that the said condition need not continue now, when the investigation is practically over. The crime is of the year 2011, and bail was granted in March, 2012. Now, we are in October, 2014. The police does not report why the said condition should continue now, when the investigation is practically over. The petitioner seeks orders on the ground that he is involved in a crime registered in the State of Tamil Nadu, and as a condition for bail in the said crime, he will have to report before the investigating officer, periodically. If the condition imposed here is not set aside, he cannot comply with the Crl.M.C.. No. 491/2013 3 condition in the other crime. In the above circumstances, especially when there is no necessity to continue the condition now in October, 2014, the objectionable condition can be set aside.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Condition No.2 imposed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam as per order dated 14.03.2012 in C.M.P. No.619/2012 will stand set aside.

Sd/-


                                              P. UBAID, JUDGE

sd

                         // TRUE COPY //    P.A. TO JUDGE