V B MOHAMMEDKUTTY Vs. STATE OF KEALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the fourth accused in a crime registered initially interalia under Sections 120B and 384 read with 34 I.P.C. Later, in the course of investigation, allegations under the Prevention of Corruption Act have also been raised against the petitioner. Though the crime was registered as early as in 2002, the petitioner was not available for arrest and was shown as absconding. The petitioner had come before this court seeking anticipatory bail. Thus, he did know about the pendency of the proceedings against him. He ultimately surrendered before the learned Magistrate, as directed by this court, in the anticipatory bail application. He was not granted bail by the learned Magistrate. He came to this court again and by Annexure A1 order dated 05/02/2007 in B.A.No.579 of 2007, the learned Magistrate was directed to release the petitioner on bail subject to appropriate conditions including the condition to surrender his passport. The learned Magistrate released the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, he surrendered the passport before the learned Magistrate but to the shock of the investigating authorities, they found out that the petitioner had travelled abroad and held press conference at such place, abroad. In these circumstances, application was filed for cancellation of bail. The learned Magistrate, after considering the application for cancellation of bail held that bail need not be cancelled but directed the petitioner to surrender his real passport before the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the real passport has now been surrendered.

(2.) The petitioner then applied before the learned Magistrate for release of the real passport to him to facilitate his journey to his place of employment abroad. He contended that release of the passport to him is essential to enable him to undertake a journey to Baharin, in connection with his business. The learned Magistrate did not grant the said prayer. That order is not produced. But it is submitted that the learned Magistrate refused the prayer as the surrender of passport was insisted by this court in Annexure A1 order.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the passport may be directed to be released to him. If it is not so released, it shall cause serious prejudice, hardship and inconvenience to the petitioner. His business interests shall be affected. The visas issued to him cannot be renewed. He wants to proceed to Baharin in connection with his treatment for his heart ailment. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the passport may be directed to be released.