Kerala High Court
M.Faziludheen vs State Of Kerala on 23 November, 2015
Author: B. Kemal Pasha
Bench: B.Kemal Pasha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/28TH MAGHA, 1937
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 204 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 1496/2015 OF CHADAYAMANAGALAM POLICE STATION,KOLLAM DISTRICT
(CMP.NO.945/2016 IN C.C.NO.60/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, KADAKKAL)
-----------
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
-------------------------------------------
M.FAZILUDHEEN,
S/O.MUHAMMED ISMAYIL, FROOK MANZIL, MADANADA,
CHADAYAMANGALAM P.O., KOLLAM.
THE REAL NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER IN THE PASSPORT IS :
KAMALUDEEN HAKKEEM, S/O.KAMALUDEEN,
THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 001.
BY SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE.P.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 204 of 2016
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEX A1 COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.60/2016.
ANNEX A2 COPY OF THE LETTER OF DEPUTY SUPDT. OF POLICE DATED
23/11/2015
ANNEX A3 COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 8/12/2015 BY THE PASSPORT OFFICE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
ANNEX A4 COPY OF THE PETITION FOR DISCHARGE, CMP NO.945/2016 IN
C.C.NO.60/2016
ANNEX A5 COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PROSECUTION.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
sts
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
................................................................
CRL.R.P. No. 204 of 2016
...............................................................
Dated this the 17th day of February, 2016
O R D E R
Admitted. Perused the records. Heard both sides.
2. Petitioner, who is the first accused in C.C.No.60/16 of the Temporary Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kadakkal, has filed CMP No.945/2016 under Section 239 Cr.P.C. before the court below, seeking a discharge. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 468 and 471 IPC and Section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act. Through the impugned order, the court below has found that the offence under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act is not legally sustainable in view of want of sanction for prosecution under Section 15 of the Passports Act. No previous sanction for prosecution is obtained in this case and as such the court below has rightly found that the offence under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act is not CRL.R.P. No. 204 of 2016 -: 2 :- legally sustainable as against the petitioner.
3. Regarding the offences under Sections 468 and 471 of IPC, the court below has found that no sanction was required and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to a discharge. The court below, through the impugned order, held that there were sufficient materials to proceed against the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to a discharge in respect of the offences under Sections 468 and 471 IPC.
4. On a perusal of the final report, it seems that the complaint against the petitioner is that he has acquired Indian Passport bearing Reg.No.K.7410924 at Riyadh with the aid and assistance of the 2nd accused, by furnishing forged documents containing his false address and details and by making use of the said forged documents as genuine.
5. The final report itself clearly shows that, the offence was allegedly committed abroad, and no documents CRL.R.P. No. 204 of 2016 -: 3 :- could be procured by the investigating officer to show that he had forged and fabricated any documents and acquired the Indian Passport by making use of such forged documents as genuine. The forged documents allegedly made use of by the petitioner for acquiring the Indian Passport have not been seized and produced. The investigating officer has stated in the final report that such documents could not be procured from Riyadh and therefore, those documents have not been produced before the court below.
6. Apart from all the above, when the offences have been committed abroad, previous sanction of the Central Government for prosecution under Section 188 Cr.P.C. is required in the matter and such a sanction has also not been obtained in this case.
7. In order to prove forgery and forgery for the purpose of cheating, and further that false documents were made use of as genuine, those forged documents made use CRL.R.P. No. 204 of 2016 -: 4 :- of by the petitioner are required. Without those documents to prove the offence, including the offences under Sections 468 and 471 IPC, there cannot be a prima facie case as against the petitioner. Matters being so, this is a case wherein the petitioner is entitled to the relief of discharge from the offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 also. Accordingly, the impugned order requires a modification to that effect. Therefore, that part of the impugned order whereby the relief of discharge in respect of the offences under Sections 468 and 471 IPC has been denied to the petitioner, is set aside. The findings entered by the court below in respect of the offence under Section 12 (1)(b) of the Passports Act, is confirmed.
In the result, this Crl.R.P. is allowed and that part of the impugned order whereby the relief of discharge in respect of the offences under Sections 468 and 471 IPC has been denied to the petitioner, is set aside. The petitioner is discharged in respect of the offences under Sections 468 CRL.R.P. No. 204 of 2016 -: 5 :- and 471 IPC also, along with the offence under Section 12 (1)(b) of the Passports Act.
Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.
ul/-
[True copy] P.S. to Judge