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 12, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

Shahjahan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 7 May, 2021

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 KER 479

Author: P Gopinath

Bench: P Gopinath

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                          PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

  FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1943

                 Crl.MC.No.2415 OF 2021(B)

  AGAINST ORDER DATED 23.3.2021 IN CMP 545 OF 2021 IN CC
      266/2011 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
                      -I,NEDUMANGAD

    CRIME NO.1009/2010 OF Venjaramoodu Police Station ,
                     Thiruvananthapuram

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

           SHAHJAHAN
           AGED 44 YEARS
           S/O HANEEFA,
           MANPURAM HOUSE, KOONENVENGA, MANIKKALMURI,
           PULLAMBARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

           BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT & STATE:

     1     THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
           VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION,
           CRIME NO.1009/2010, PIN-695607.

     2     THE STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, COCHIN-682031.


OTHER PRESENT:

           SRI C.S HRITHWIK PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.05.2021, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2417/2021(B), THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case      2


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

   FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1943

                      Crl.MC.No.2417 OF 2021(B)

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2021 IN CMP NO.544 OF 2021 IN
  CC 1450/2013 DATED 25-03-2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                 FIRST CLASS -I,NEDUMANGAD

     CRIME NO.210/2013 OF Venjaramoodu Police Station ,
                     Thiruvananthapuram


PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

               SHAHJAHAN
               AGED 44 YEARS
               S/O. HANEEFA, MANPURAM HOUSE, KOONENVENGA,
               MANIKKAL MURI, PULLAMBARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD
               TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

               BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS & STATE:

       1       THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
               VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION, CRIME NO. 210/2013

       2       THE STATE OF KERALA,
               REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
               KERALA, COCHIN-682 031


OTHER PRESENT:
            SRI C.S HRITHWIK PP

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.05.2021, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2415/2021(B), THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case       3




                                  ORDER

Dated this the 7th day of May 2021 These petitions are filed by the same petitioner seeking to quash an order dated 23.3.2021 in C.M.P.No.545/2021 in C.C.No.266/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangadu and the order in C.M.P.No.544/2021 in C.C.No.1450/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangadu (JFCM-1, Nedumangadu).

2. It is submitted that there are three cases pending against the petitioner in the JFCM-1, Nedumangadu (i) as C.C.No.1538/2014 alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 353 of the Indian Penal Code, (ii) C.C.No.266/2011 alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 427 and 506(i) r/w.Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and (iii) C.C.No.1450/2013 alleging the commission of offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the petitioner had filed an application as C.M.P.No.183/2021 in C.C.No.1538/2014 seeking permission to renew his passport in terms of the provisions of Section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967 and the provisions of Notification No.GSR 570(E) dated 25.8.1993 issued in exercise of the power under Section 22(a) of the Passports Act, 1967 and the Court had, by order marked as Annexure-1 in both these cases, permitted the petitioner to Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case 4 renew his passport for a period of one year with the condition that the petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required. It is the case of the petitioner that, when he filed similar applications in C.C.No.1450/2013 and C.C.No.266/2011, the same was rejected by the orders impugned in both these cases, on 23.3.2021.

3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the permission sought for in C.C.Nos.1450/2017 and 266/2011 were refused on the sole ground that while obtaining permission to renew passport in C.C.No.1538/2014, the petitioner had failed to disclose the pendency of the other two cases against him. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the pendency of the other cases was not specifically mentioned only because similar C.M.Ps had been filed in the other cases and on account of the impression that this would be sufficient notice of the fact that there were other cases pending against the petitioner. I have heard the Learned Public Prosecutor also.

4. A reading of the impugned order in Crl.M.C.No.2417/2021 shows that the failure to mention the fact that there were other cases pending while obtaining permission to renew the passport in C.C.No.1538/2014 was only one of the reasons which led the learned Magistrate to hold that no permission need be granted in C.C.No.1450/2013. It is seen that the petitioner had failed to appear before the Court from 17.9.2014 to 6.7.2015 resulting in a warrant being issued to him on 15.12.2015 and that he, thereafter, appeared before the Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case 5 Court only on 29.5.2017. The learned Magistrate noted that the alleged offence is one under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code where the identity of the accused is a serious issue. The learned Magistrate also noted that the case is of the year 2013 and that the trial of the case got delayed only on account of the fact that the petitioner/accused failed to appear before the Court.

5. Considering the reasons stated by the learned Magistrate while disposing C.M.P.No.544/2021 in C.C.No.1450/2013, I am of the view that even ignoring the fact that the petitioner had failed to mention that there were other cases pending against him while obtaining permission to renew the passport in C.C..No.1538/2014, that is only one of the reasons which led the learned Magistrate to refuse permission. Those reasons are valid and reasonable. I therefore, find no reason to interfere with Annexure-3 order in Crl.M.C.No.2417/2021.

6. Insofar as Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 is concerned, on going through the impugned Annexure-3 order in C.M.P.No.545/2021 in C.C.No.266/2011, it is noticed that as in the other case, the learned Magistrate had noted the failure to mention the fact that there were other cases pending against the petitioner while obtaining an order in C.C.No.1538/2014 as one of the reasons to refuse the permission for renewal of passport in C.C.No.266/2011. The learned Magistrate has also found that C.C.No.266/2011 is also an old case and allowing the petition will affect disposal of the matter. Considering the reasons mentioned in Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case 6 Annexure-3 order in Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021, even if the fact of non- mentioning of other pending cases is ignored, the other reasons stated by the learned Magistrate appear to justify the rejection of the application. Therefore, I find no reason to quash Annexure-3 order in Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021.

7. However, in the totality of the facts and circumstances of these cases, I am of the opinion that since the cases relate to the year 2011 and 2013, a direction can be issued to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangadu to endeavour to dispose of these cases at the earliest Subject to this direction, Crl.M.C.Nos.2415/2021 and 2417/2021 will stand dismissed.

SD/ GOPINATH P. JUDGE acd Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case 7 APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2415/2021 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.02.2021 IN CMP NO.183 OF 2021 IN C.C.NO.1538 OF 2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-1, NEDUMANGADU.

ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE C.M.P NO.545 OF 2021 DATED 03.03.2021 IN C.C. NO.266 OF 2011.

ANNEXURE-3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2021 IN C.M.P.NO.545 OF 2021 IN C.C. NO. 266 OF 2011.

Crl.M.C.No.2415/2021 & con.case 8

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2417/2021 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.02.2021 IN CMP NO.183 OF 2021 IN C.C.NO.1538 OF 2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATES COURT-1, NEDUMANGADU ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE C.M.P.NO.544 OF 2021 DATED 01.03.2021 IN C.C.NO.1450 OF 2013 ANNEXURE-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2021 IN C.M.P.NO.544 OF 2021 IN C.C.NO.1450 OF 2013