IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2010 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4334 of 2010(B) -------------------------------------- [CB CID CRIME NO/469/CR/S1/04 OF THE NARCOTIC AND ECONOMIC OFFENCES CELL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM] ............ PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- BABU,S/O.NARAYANAN,AGED 37 YEARS, CHANASSERI HOUSE,CHITTILAPPILLY,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN, SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH, SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR, SMT.VANDANA MENON, SMT.ANJU P.NAIR. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.(CR.NO.344/2004 OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4334 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 13th December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the third accused in Crime No.469/CR/S1/04 of Narcotic and Economic Offences, Cell, Thiruvananthapuram filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that though the petitioner has been implicated as an accused, he has nothing to do with the offence and there is nothing to connect the petitioner with the offence and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petitioner would contend that he is a building contractor and has been implicated on the allegation that Renjitha Subramanian was arrested by Emigration Authorities, Crmc 4334/10 2 International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram on 19/11/2004 on the allegation of possessing a forged emigration clearance endorsement in her passport and the said Renjitha disclosed that visa and air ticket were arranged by one Rafeeq of National Travels and Vijay Nair of Shine Associates and one Babu who is her neighbour. It is on that basis the petitioner has been implicated as an accused and though the incident was in 2004, till this day final report has not been submitted and nothing was collected to implicate him and in such circumstances, prosecution against the petitioner is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that even if the Crmc 4334/10 3 statement of Renjitha is accepted, in the light of her statement shown in Annexure-C, petitioner cannot be implicated, as at best, it could only be said that the petitioner introduced Renjitha to a travel agency but he did not take part further in the transaction and in such circumstances, the case against the petitioner is to be quashed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor on verifying the case diary submitted that nothing was so far collected against the petitioner except original statement that Renjitha informed the petitioner that she needs a visa and petitioner introduced her to Rafeeq of National Travels. It is submitted that there is nothing further to show apart from the said statement that petitioner had anything to do with the transaction or received any benefit. 5. Annexure-C communication sent by the Crmc 4334/10 4 Port Registration Officer, Thiruvananthapuram Airport to the Sub Inspector of Police based on which Annexure-A FIR was registered shows that on 19/11/2004 at 5.10 a.m Renjitha, holding Indian passport No.E 9513105, approached the Immigration counter for her onward journey to Muscat by Oman Airways Flight, for employment as housemaid. On verification Sub Inspector got suspicion about the genuineness of the Emigration clearance endorsement, which is purported to be issued by the Protector of Emigrance, Thiruvananthapuram. It was verified with the specimen available in the office to ascertain whether it is genuine. Finding that it is not genuine, Renjitha was questioned. She disclosed that her air ticket and visa were arranged by one Rafeeq of National Travels, East Nada, Guruvayur and one Vijay Nair and Babu, her Crmc 4334/10 5 neighbour by paying Rs.25,000/- and she is not aware of anything about the forged Emigration clearance. It is based on the said statement, the petitioner was implicated as an accused. The statement of Renjitha, recorded, reveals that she contacted the petitioner, her neighbour to know whether she could get visa and he promised to introduce her to Rafeeq of National Travels. Petitioner introduced her to Rafeeq. There is nothing in the statement that the petitioner had anything to do with either the visa or the air ticket or the forged Emigration clearance. For the sole reason that the petitioner introduced Renjitha to a travel agent, it cannot be said that the petitioner was a party to the forgery committed. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that case diary does not contain anything to connect the petitioner with the offence except the Crmc 4334/10 6 statement of Renjitha referred to earlier. It is to be born in mind that the case was registered in 2004 and for more than six years, it is being investigated. Still, nothing could be collected to establish any connection for the petitioner with the forged Emigration clearance. In such circumstances, continuation of the case against petitioner is only an abuse of process of the Court. Petition is allowed. Prosecution of the petitioner in Crime No.469/CR/S1/04 of Narcotic and Economic Offences Cell, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed. But investigation against the other can be proceeded. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.