Kerala High court order stating that NRI Husband's passport is to be released on placing surety etc in 498a case
Kerala High court order stating that NRI Husband's passport is to be released on placing surety etc in 498a case
******************************************
Tharayil Peedikayil Aboobacker vs The Station House Officer on 22 June, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.MC.No. 1826 of 2011()
1. THARAYIL PEEDIKAYIL ABOOBACKER ... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ... Respondent
2. THE STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH Dated :22/06/2011
O R D E R
THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.
Crl.M.C.No.1826 of 2011
Dated this 22nd day of June, 2011
ORDER
Petitioner is accused in C.C.No.609 of 2010 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur for offence punishable under Sec.498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC").
Learned Magistrate granted bail to the petitioner subject to condition that he shall surrender his passport. He complied with that condition. Since petitioner is employed abroad he filed C.M.P.No.1285 of 2011 to release the passport. That application was dismissed by Annexure-A3, order dated March 30, 2011. That order is under challenge.
Learned counsel submits that since petitioner is employed abroad, the passport may be released to him or else he will loose his job. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner is prepared to appear before learned Magistrate as and when directed and that trial could proceed in the presence of his lawyer. Petitioner is prepared to abide by any other condition that may be imposed by the learned Magistrate. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also.
2. As the offence attributed to the petitioner is under Sec.498A of the IPC there is no possibility of any dispute on identity of the offender. Having regard to the circumstances I do not find reason why the passport shall not be released to the petitioner. I am inclined to allow the application but, subject to conditions.
Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Annexure-A3, order dated March 30, 2011 on C.M.P.No.1285 of 2011 is set aside and that petition is allowed. Passport of the petitioner shall be released to him subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner shall appear in Court as and when directed by the learned Magistrate.
2. As the offence attributed to the petitioner is under Sec.498A of the IPC there is no possibility of any dispute on identity of the offender. Having regard to the circumstances I do not find reason why the passport shall not be released to the petitioner. I am inclined to allow the application but, subject to conditions.
Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Annexure-A3, order dated March 30, 2011 on C.M.P.No.1285 of 2011 is set aside and that petition is allowed. Passport of the petitioner shall be released to him subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner shall appear in Court as and when directed by the learned Magistrate.
(ii) Petitioner shall file an affidavit before the learned Magistrate stating that his plea (if not already recorded) could be recorded through his counsel and that trial shall be conducted in his absence in the presence of his counsel whose name and address shall be mentioned in the affidavit.
(iii) Petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the like sum each undertaking to appear before Court as and when required by the learned Magistrate.
(iv) On execution of the bond as aforesaid and filing the affidavit, the passport shall be released to the petitioner.
(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)
Sbna/-
source : indiankanoon dot org
(iii) Petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the like sum each undertaking to appear before Court as and when required by the learned Magistrate.
(iv) On execution of the bond as aforesaid and filing the affidavit, the passport shall be released to the petitioner.
(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)
Sbna/-
source : indiankanoon dot org
*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family Foundation. SIF is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************
*****************
FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
regards
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist
No comments:
Post a Comment