IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3065 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.138/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- HARVEY, AGED 33,S/O.STEPHEN,THATTASSERY HOUSE, CHERIYA VAPPALISSERY,NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.JAISON JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANGAMALY POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.14/10/2009 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 3065 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 14th October 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.138/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Aluva. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A1 order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing Crl.M.P.2445/2009 filed under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for interim custody of Nokia Mobile phone seized from the petitioner. Prosecution case is that on 25/3/2009 at about 12 noon, petitioner attempted to take photographs of women near ATM counter of State Bank of India from near the KSRTC bus stand, Angamaly and thereby committed the offence. Learned Magistrate dismissed the petition for the reason that it is a material object necessary for the evidence and therefore, it cannot be released. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to give any security and produce the mobile phone for the purpose of trial and in such circumstances, it is CRMC 3065/09 2 to be released to the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that value of mobile phone is more than Rs.20,000/- and if, it is kept idle, it would be deteriorated. Learned counsel also argued that even the offence alleged against the petitioner will not lie. 3. On hearing the learned counsel, I find no reason to interfere with Annexure-A1 order. Learned Magistrate could be directed to dispose the case expeditiously. 4. Petition is dismissed. Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Aluva is directed to dispose C.C.138/2009 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from today. If the phone numbers stored in the mobile phone are necessary for the petitioner, he is at liberty to apply for permission to get the details from the mobile phone and if, such an application is filed, Magistrate to permit petitioner to collect the details stored in the mobile phone in the presence of the investigating officer or a responsible officer of the court. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.