K S MUHAMMED SAMEER Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner faces allegations under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act. The crux of the allegation is that huge loss of revenue was caused by the alleged conduct of the petitioner importing articles by misdescribing them and showing lesser value than the actual value. It is the case of the prosecution that the difference between the actual price and the price shown has been transferred through unauthorised channels. The petitioner has been released on bail subject to conditions. Inter alia, a condition is imposed that the passport of the petitioner must be surrendered before the court. The respondent is thus in possession of the passport of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner approached the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (EO), Ernakulam, with an application for modification of the condition and release of the passport to the petitioner. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has rejected the prayer in the wake of the stout opposition by the respondent/prosecution. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the said order.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner needs the passport emergently to help him to travel to his place of employment in Dubai. What is the compelling reason? The short submission made is that the employer of the petitioner has cautioned him that if he does not return to his place of employment he will lose his employment as also the VISA which has been issued to him. If this happens it would result in great hardship and loss to the petitioner. In these circumstances it is prayed that the passport may be directed to be released to the petitioner subject to any appropriate condition. Atleast the petitioner may be permitted to undertake one journey to Dubai and return within a period of one month, it is prayed.