IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018
CRMC 1111/2018 of D.C. SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM
CRIME NO.502/2018 OF PALLITHOTTAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 3:
1 RAJALEKSHMI @ NISHA,
AGED 43 YEARS,
D/O. PANKAJAKSHAN NAIR, 140A(8/188), ANNYDANAM -II,
CHERTHALA SOUTH P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 688552
2 GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER @ GOPAN,
AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O DAMODHARAN NAIR, VADAKKE THAYYIL VEEDU,
CHERTHALA SOUTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 31
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PALLITHOTTAM POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 006.
SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 2
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure (‘the Code” for brevity).
2. The petitioners herein are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime
No.502 of 2018 of the Pallithottam Police Station. In the aforesaid
Crime, they are accused of having committed offences punishable
under Sections 406, 420, 494, 498A and 323 r/w Section 34 IPC.
3. The prosecution allegation is that the 1 st accused in the
aforesaid crime induced the de facto complainant to marry him by
suppressing the fact that he was a married man. It is further
alleged that the petitioners herein impersonated as the sister and
brother-in-law of the 1st accused with intent to persuade her to
marry the 1st accused. The accused are also alleged to have
committed criminal breach of trust by misappropriating ₹ 49 lakhs
and 40 sovereigns of gold.
4. The petitioners were granted an order of pre-arrest bail
by the Court of Sessions by Annexure-1 order. There were,
however, directed to surrender their respective passports before the
investigating officer, who, in turn, was directed to produce the same
before the Court having jurisdiction. In terms of the said direction,
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 3
the passports were surrendered by the petitioners.
5. They then approached the learned Sessions Judge and
filed an application with a prayer to release the passports in order
to enable them to go abroad and to join their family. They
specifically contended that they are working abroad in an
advertising company and their children are studying there. They
undertook that they shall appear as and when directed and sought
for appropriate orders.
6. The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order has
dismissed the application accepting the contention of the learned
Public Prosecutor that the passports are material evidence which
would show that the petitioners had come down to India to deceive
the de facto complainant. It was also held that if the passports are
released, the petitioners would go abroad and delay the trial.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned Public Prosecutor. I have also considered the submissions
advanced. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the
learned Sessions Judge was not justified in dismissing the
application of the petitioners. The petitioners were granted an order
of pre-arrest bail by the Court of Sessions after appreciating the
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 4
facts and circumstances of the case and also the role assigned to
them. In terms of the directions issued by the learned Sessions
Judge, the petitioners had appeared before the investigating officer
and had co-operated with the investigation. The final report has not
been laid till date and in that view of the matter, depriving the
petitioners of their means of livelihood does not appear to be
justified. I am of the view that the interest of the prosecution is not
likely to suffer, if the petitioners are permitted to go abroad for a
period of one year by imposing appropriate conditions.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed and the
learned Magistrate is directed to release the passports and grant
permission to the petitioners to go abroad for a period of one year
months on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum
to the satisfaction of the court below. It shall also be subject to the
1. The court below shall grant permission to the
petitioners to go abroad for a period of one year.
The petitioners shall give an undertaking before
the Court below that they will return their
passports before the Court within a period of one
year from the date of obtaining release of the
passports from Court.
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 5
2. The petitioners shall submit true attested
copies of their respective passport along with the
VISA before the court below and also furnish their
residential address abroad. They shall also leave
the name and other particulars, including mobile
phone number, email address etc. of themselves
and their local Advocate, who could be contacted
by the Court or Investigating officer for giving any
direction to the petitioners.
3. If the presence of the petitioners is
inevitable for any purpose, on intimation to the
petitioners or to their lawyer, the petitioners shall
appear before the learned Magistrate.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
IAP //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 7477 of 2018 6
ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN
CRL.M.C.NO.1111/2018 DATED 27.7.2018 ON
THE FILE OF SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.
ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF PETITION IN
CRL.M.P.NO.1112/2018 FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS FOR RETURN OF THEIR PASSPORT.
ANNEXURE 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN
CRL.M.C.NO.1111/2018 DATED 2.11.2018 ON
THE FILE OF SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.