IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 1ST MAGHA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.539 OF 2020(F)

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2019 IN CMP.NO.3303/2019 IN
CC 241/2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
PARAVUR

CRIME NO.141/2002 OF Paravoor Police Station, Kollam

PETITIONER :

BINU,
AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O BRAHMADATHAN,CHARUVILA VEEDU,
KOONAYIL, PARAVOOR.P.O,
KOLLAM DISTRICT – 691 301.

BY ADVS.
SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SRI.M.KIRANLAL
SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
SRI.T.S.SARATH
SMT.AKHILA B.
SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR

RESPONDENTS :

1 UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS,
NEW DELHI – 110 001.

2 THE PASSPORT OFFICER,
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS,
KAITHAMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 024.

R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR
BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJED ALI

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.539 OF 2020

2

Crl.M.C.No.539 of 2020

ORDER

The petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.241/2019

on the files of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First

Class, S.Paravur. The case aforesaid is one instituted upon a

police report under Section 498A read with 34 of the Indian

Penal Code. The de facto complainant is the wife of the first

accused and the accusation in the case against the accused in

essence is that when they were residing together, the de facto

complainant was subjected to cruelty by the accused. It is

stated that the petitioner has secured an employment abroad

and he moved the court below, in the circumstances, for

permission to go abroad. In terms of Annexure A3 order, the

court below ordered that the court has no objection in the

authorities under the Passports Act issuing passport to the

petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that since the court

has not clarified as to the term during which the petitioner is

permitted to go abroad, the authorities under the Passports Act

would issue passport to the petitioner only for a period of one

year in terms of the orders presently in force. It is also stated by

the petitioner that if the petitioner is issued passport only for a
Crl.M.C.No.539 OF 2020

3

period of one year, he may not get the job which he is

expecting. It is also stated by the petitioner that in order to get

the job which the petitioner is expecting, the term of the

passport shall be at least two years. The petitioner, therefore,

seeks appropriate directions in this regard.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

learned Central Government Counsel as also the learned Public

Prosecutor.

3. Having regard to the accusation against the

petitioner, I am of the view that it is a case where the court

below could have prescribed the term in the order, during which

the petitioner can be permitted to go abroad, for, the same

would not, in any way, prejudice the prosecution. In the said

view of the matter, the Crl.M.C is disposed of permitting the

petitioner to go abroad for a period of two years. The competent

authority under the Passports Act shall issue passport to the

petitioner for a period of two years, if he applies for the same

and he is otherwise entitled for the same.

Sd/-

P.B. SURESH KUMAR
JUDGE
RKM
Crl.M.C.No.539 OF 2020

4

APPENDIX

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES :

A1 : COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

A2 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS
CMP.NO.3303/2019 IN CC.NO.241/2019.

A3 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2019 OF THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM
DISTRICT.

A4 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 25.08.1993.

A5 : COPY OF THE ONLINE APPOINTMENT RECEIPT OF PASSPORT
APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : NIL

TRUE COPY

PA TO JUDGE

RKM