Telangana High Court
Athluri Rama Chaitanya vs The State Of Telangana on 3 February, 2023
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
CRIMINAL R.C.Nos.80 and 82 of 2023
COMMON ORDER :
These revision cases are filed against the orders of the Special Judge for trial of cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act-cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, dated 17.01.2023, passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.445 and 446 of 2022 in Crime Nos.169 and 170 of 2021 respectively, of CCS, DD, Hyderabad, whereby, the trial Court has dismissed the said petitions which were filed for return of passport bearing No.560891817 of the petitioner herein.
2. It is pertinent to mention that two crimes i.e. Crime Nos.380 and 381 of 2021 of P.S. Jubilee Hills, were registered against the petitioner herein, which were later transferred to CCS, DD, Hyderabad and are re-numbered as Crime Nos.169 and 170 of 2021 respectively.
2
GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023
3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent- State.
4. It is contented by the learned counsel for petitioner that Crime No.380 of 2021 was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 324 of IPC and Section 9 r/w. Section 10 of POCSO Act, whereas, Crime No.381 of 2021 was registered against him for the offences under Section 376 (A) and (B) of IPC and Section 5 r/w. Sections 6 and 16 of POCSO Act, on the file of Jubilee Hills Police Station.
5. Initially, the petitioner was granted bail with a condition to deposit his passport and accordingly, he deposited the passport before the trial Court i.e. the Special Judge for trial of cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act-cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Later, the petitioner has filed petition for interim custody of passport for attending orientation program 3 GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023 in USA and the said petition was allowed, granting interim custody of his passport for a period of three months with a direction to the petitioner to surrender his passport on or before 09.09.2022. Accordingly, the petitioner went to USA and sought for extension of time to surrender his passport and the said petition was also allowed with a direction to the petitioner to surrender his passport before the Court on or before 16.12.2022.
6. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner could not come to India due to his assignments and therefore, a petition was filed for further extension of time to surrender his passport, but the trial Court has dismissed the said petition and issued Non-bailable Warrants (NBWs.) against the petitioner. Pursuant to the orders of the trial Court, the petitioner came down to India, filed petition to recall his NBWs., and also surrendered his passport. The trial Court recalled the NBWs. and since then, the passport of petitioner is in the custody of the trial Court. 4
GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023 Later, two petitions were filed by the petitioner i.e. Crl.M.P.Nos.445 and 446 of 2022 seeking interim custody of passport, which were dismissed by the trial Court by impugned orders dated 17.01.2023.
7. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is a permanent resident of USA and is working in private organizations on contract basis and entered into contracts with those Companies and he has to complete his works, therefore, it is necessary for the petitioner to go to USA, as in his absence, the works cannot be completed. It is further contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that interim custody of passport may be given to the petitioner by imposing certain conditions, as the petitioner has to go to USA to eke-out his livelihood.
8. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State opposed for giving interim custody of passport to the petitioner, contending 5 GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023 that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are grave in nature and if he is allowed to go to USA, he will not attend before the Court.
9. Perused the record.
10. From the rival contentions of the learned counsel for petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, it is evident that the revision petitioner is a permanent resident of USA and he is eking out his livelihood by doing contract works at USA. The trial Court has initially granted interim custody of passport and accordingly, petitioner went to USA and sought for extension of time and during the said period, he stayed at USA. Subsequently, he could not come down to India, therefore, NBWs. have been issued by the trial Court and abiding by the orders of the trial Court, the petitioner has come down to India and sought for recall of his NBWs. and the trial Court has recalled the NBWs.
6
GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023
11. It is reported by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the investigation is still in progress in both the crimes.
12. Taking into consideration the fact that the investigation is still pending and charge sheet was not filed, though the crimes were registered in the year 2021, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and necessary to direct the trial Court to handover passport of the petitioner for interim custody, considering the bonafides of the petitioner and further, his livelihood cannot be denied, who is the resident of USA. Furthermore, the petitioner is appearing before the trial Court, abiding the orders of the trial Court.
13. Therefore, both these revision cases are allowed and the trial Court is directed to handover the passport of the petitioner bearing No.560891817 for interim custody for a period of one year from the date of its handing over to the petitioner, on his furnishing a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) with one surety for like sum, in each of the crime, to the 7 GAC, J Crl.RC.Nos.80 & 82 of 2023 satisfaction of the Special Judge for trial of cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act- cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Further, the petitioner shall appear before the trial Court, if necessary, after six months from today. Furthermore, the petitioner shall furnish his e-mail address, his present address at USA and also the addresses of the Companies for which he is doing contracts. The passport of petitioner shall be handed over to him on or before 08.02.2023, subject to the petitioner complying with the aforesaid directions. The petitioner shall surrender his passport to the trial Court after expiry of one year from the date of its handing over to him.
14. With the above directions, both these revision cases are allowed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J Date: 03.02.2023 N.B : Issue C.C. today.
(b/o) ajr