BIJUMON @ NAVAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.979/2014 of Adoor Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 370A, 417, 354, 376, 506(i) r/w 34 of IPC and Section 10 r/w 24(1)(b) of the Emigration Act , 1983. The petitioner was granted bail by this Court as per Annexure-A1 order. One among the conditions in Annexure-A1 is that the petitioner should surrender his passport before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court immediately on his release. Accordingly, he surrendered his passport before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor and later, filed an application before this Court for deleting the condition regarding surrender of passport. The said application was disposed of making it clear that it is for the jurisdictional Magistrate Court to independently consider the plea for deleting the condition, after taking due note of the submissions and objections of the investigating agency. Accordingly, the petitioner moved the Magistrate Court and by Annexure-A3 order, the application was rejected, finding the apprehension expressed by the investigating officer regarding the possibility of the petitioner going abroad and absconding from the process of law to be well founded. Aggrieved by Annexure-A3 order, the petitioner again approached this Court and by Annexure-A4, this Court set aside Annexure-A3 and granted permission to the petitioner to travel to Kuwait and return to India within one month from the date of his departure. The permission was granted subject to stringent conditions.

(2.) This Criminal M.C. is filed, seeking permission to go abroad and for that purpose, to issue a direction to the Magistrate Court to release the Passport and Civil ID of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has been working in Kuwait for more than 18 years, his daughter is perusing her studies at Kuwait and that, the petitioner being the sponsor of his daughter, his presence before the Foreign Affairs Ministry of the Government of Kuwait is absolutely essential for extending the Civil ID of his daughter. Reference is made to Annexure-A7 in support of the contention that, unless the petitioner presents himself before his employer without further delay, proceedings for his residency will not be processed and his employment contract will be terminated.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer pointing out that the petitioner is alleged to have committed the heinous crime of having enticed a lady, promising to provide her with a job abroad and of having sexually exploited her after she reached Kuwait. It is submitted that the petitioner is the member of an international sex racket and investigation into those aspects will be jeopardized if the petitioner absconds after leaving India.