Telangana High Court
Gummadilli Rajesh vs The State Of Telangana, on 4 September, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9386 OF 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner/accused No.4 against the order passed in Crl.MP.No.71 of 2024 in Crime No.108 of 2023 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
2. The petitioner/accused No.4 filed Crl.MP.No.71 of 2024 under Section 451 read with Section 457 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to release his passport bearing No.Z4011084. The brief facts of the case are that the Police registered a case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (for short 'Act 1999') and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 (for short 'Act 1978'). It is stated that during registration of the said 2 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 crime, the petitioner had surrendered his passport bearing No.Z4011084 before the trial Court.
3. It was averred before the trial Court that petitioner was invited by "V Global Management Sdn Bhd" to participate in "V Malaysia 2024" which was scheduled from 12.05.2024 to 16.05.2024 at Spice Arena, Pulau Pinang and that he was required to be present there from 05.05.2024 to 25.05.2024 to participate in the said event. A copy of the said invitation card was also filed before the trial Court praying to release the passport so as to enable him to attend the said event.
4. It is seen that the learned Public Prosecutor filed a counter affidavit before the trial Court contending that petitioner is directly linked with accused No.1 - Q Net Company as he is one of the main kingpins of the said Company in India. It was further contended that the petitioner had links with the founders of accused No.1 - Company as well who are in settled in countries like Malaysia and Hong Kong. It was further contended that the investigation of the matter being in crucial stage for 3 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 collection of material evidence, it would be difficult to conclude the same if the passport of the petitioner is released as he would flee to abroad which would possible amount to absconding so as to avoid the investigation and trial of pending criminal case.
5. After hearing both sides, the trial Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 dismissed Crl.MP.No.71 of 2024 in Crime No.108 of 2023. Aggrieved thereby, this criminal petition is filed.
6. Heard Sri TS.Anirudh Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.4, and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent - State.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the role played by petitioner in the accused No.1 - Company is nowhere stated and the only averment made by the prosecution pertains to multi level marketing scheme that was executed by petitioner and others. He contended that the trial Court dismissed Crl.MP.No.71 of 2024 in a 4 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 mechanically way by not appreciating the fact that the petitioner was invited by "V Global Management Sdn Bhd"
which is a global marketing network development training and management company.
8. In addition, learned counsel for the petitioner asserted that petitioner is again to invited by "V Global Management Sdn Bhd" to participate in the event named "V Malaysia 2024" that is scheduled from 05.09.2024 to 20.09.2024 at Spice Arena, Pulau Pinang, and as petitioner is unemployed, participation in such event plays a vital role as and when he applies for jobs. In support of the said contention, he relied on the judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India 1 wherein, it was held that the right to personal liberty is tantamount to right to travel and any citizen, other than in exceptional circumstances, shall not be curtailed of his/her right to do so. 1 1978 1 SCC 248 5 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024
9. Learned counsel for petitioner reiterated that irreparable loss would be caused to the career of petitioner if he is not permitted to participate in the "V Malaysia 2024" that is scheduled from 05.09.2024 to 20.09.2024 at Spice Arena, Pulau Pinang, organised by "V Global Management Sdn Bhd". In support of his plea, reliance was placed on paragraph Nos.18 and 19 of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suresh Nanda Vs. CBI2 which reads as follows:
18. In our opinion, even the court cannot impound a passport. Though, no doubt, Section 104 CrPC states that the court may, if it thinks fit, impound any document or thing produced before it, in our opinion, this provision will only enable the court to impound any document or thing other than a passport. This is because impounding of a "passport" is provided for in Section 10(3) of the Passports Act. The Passports Act is a special law while CrPC is a general law. It is well settled that the special law prevails over the general law vide G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation (9th Edn., p. 133). This 2 2008 3 SCC 674 6 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 principle is expressed in the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant. Hence, impounding of a passport cannot be done by the court under Section 104 CrPC though it can impound any other document or thing.
19. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the impugned order of the High Court and direct the respondent to hand over the passport to the appellant within a week from today. However, it shall be open to the respondent to approach the Passport Authorities under Section 10 or the authorities under Section 10-A of the Act for impounding the passport of the appellant in accordance with law.
10. With the above set of contentions, while asserting that petitioner is more than willing to face the trial as and when the chargesheet is filed, the learned counsel for petitioner prayed the Court to allow the criminal petition, directing the trial Court to release the passport of the petitioner bearing No.Z4011084 and permitting him to travel abroad so as to enable him to participate in the 7 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 event upon which his new opportunities of work are dependent.
11. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and relied on the averments of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent - State, wherein, it is stated that during the course of investigation, the Police found that the accused persons were involved in the activities of collecting deposits and cheating number of victims in the name of e-commerce business and so far, approximately, 186 victims were found being trapped. He contended that the said victims were identified in four cases and are also examined and it is found that most of them are students who are unemployed and were trapped in the guise of higher returns and profits.
12. In addition, learned Additional Public Prosecutor lamented that during the course of investigation it was revealed that petitioner along with other 11 accused persons colluded with accused No.1 - Company - "Q Net 8 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 Company" and accused No.2 - Company - "Vihan Direct India Private Limited" which is sub-franchise of accused No.1 - Company and incorporated a bogus company styled and named as "V Empire Company"/accused No.3 and induced the victims under the guise of giving higher returns and huge profits. Further, it was also found that the accused persons do not possess any valid permission, neither under the Banking Regulation Act, nor under Reserve Bank of India norms, which would permit them to collect money in the form of deposits from the public at large and as such the same would amount to attracting the provisions under Section 5 of Act, 1999.
13. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor incessantly contended that during the course of investigation 35 bank accounts were identified which pertain to accused persons and the same were frozen under Section 102 Cr.P.C. He submitted that if the passport of the petitioner is released and he is permitted to travel to aboard, there is every possibility that he may flee away so as to avoid the trial. He lamented that the 9 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 investigation is at the crucial stage of collection of material evidence. Therefore, prayed this Court to dismiss the criminal petition, submitting that the matter requires detailed trial.
14. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the specific contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that during registration of Crime No.108 of 2023 against the petitioner, he surrendered his passport before the trial Court and at present as the petitioner is invited by "V Global Management Sdn Bhd" to participate in the event named "V Malaysia 2024" that is scheduled from 05.09.2024 to 20.09.2024 at Spice Arena, Pulau Pinang, his passport may be released so as to enable him to participate in the said event which would open doors of new employment opportunities in his career front, whereas, the contention of learned Additional Public Prosecutor is that if the petitioner is permitted to travel abroad, grave hindrance will be caused to investigation as 10 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 the investigation is at crucial stage of collecting the material evidence.
15. On meticulous perusal of the material placed on record, it is revealed that apart from registration of Crime No.108 of 2023 against the petitioner which is the subject matter of case on hand, the petitioner is also implicated in Crime Nos.109, 110 and 184 of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 506 of IPC, Section 5 of Act, 1999 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Act, 1978, respectively.
16. In view thereof, this Court is of the firm opinion that there is no force in the contentions made by learned counsel for petitioner. However, though the learned counsel for petitioner relied on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi (supra 1) it is pertinent to note that the facts of the case on hand are not relevant to the said judgment. Therefore, as there are several other cases registered against the petitioner and the investigation in the case on hand is pending at a 11 SKS, J Crl.P.No.9386 OF 2024 crucial stage, there are no merits in the criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
17. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date:04.09.2024 PT