IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 873 of 2008() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/02/2008 IN CRMP 531/08 & 532/08 IN CC.40/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PERAMBRA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------------- M.KOYAKKUTTY, S/O. ABOOBACKER, MANAPPOYIL HOUSE, P.O.NEELESWARAM, VIA.KODUVALLY. BY ADV. SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- 1. PAULSON GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, ARAKKAL HOUSE, KALLANODE P.O., KOTTAYAM VIA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== CRL.M.C. No. 873 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008. O R D E R The petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C. No. 40 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Perambra, challenges the order dated 20.02.2008 passed by the Magistrate dismissing Crl.M.P.Nos. 531 and 532 of 2008. The above proceedings have arisen out of a protest complaint. 2. He was granted bail by the learned Magistrate and one of the bail conditions was that he should surrender his passport before the Magistrate. According to the petitioner, he has been working in Riyadh from September, 2003 onwards and it was since his mother was laid up and in a critical condition that he came on leave and surrendered before the court below and was released on bail. The petitioner is desirous of rejoining his duty for which purpose he filed Crl.M.P. No. 531 of 2008 for release of his passport and Cr.M.P. No. 532/2008 praying for exemption from personal appearance. Both the applications were dismissed by the learned Magistrate. Hence this Crl.M.C. CRL.M.C. NO. 873/2008 : 2: 3. First of all, C.C. No. 40 of 2008 is not likely to be taken up for trial in the near future. There is no need to insist on the personal appearance of the accused on all the posting dates. Moreover, since the accused does not dispute his identity, it may not be necessary to insist on his personal appearance unless it is inevitable during trial. I, therefore, do not find any good reason as to why the passport of the petitioner should not be released. Accordingly, the court below shall release the passport of the petitioner and permit him to appear before the court through his counsel, in case he files an affidavit to that effect undertaking that he will not question the capacity of the prosecution witnesses to identify him nor shall he raise any dispute regarding his identity. It shall, however, be open to the Magistrate to insist upon the personal appearance of the accused at any stage of the trial. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL.M.C. NO. 873/2008 : 3: