IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3527 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.2721/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PATTAMBI .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SHYJU S/O. RAMAN@ APPUTTY, MELEPURATH VEEDU, EDAPPALAM, VILAYOOR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI POLICE STATION - THROUTH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 31 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.3527 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 ORDER Petitioner along with his brother faces allegations of patricide. The alleged incident took place on 21.03.2008. The body was allegedly disposed of clandestinely. It was recovered on 25.03.08. In the meantime, both the brothers had gone abroad. It is alleged that both the brothers had agreed that the petitioner shall return and own responsibility for the crime. He did come down to India. He was arrested on 2.4.08. He is allegedly owning the responsibility for the crime. The police are not satisfied. According to the police, the brother of the petitioner is the principal offender. The petitioner remained in custody for about 60 days and has been released on bail on 28.05.08 subject to conditions. The conditions imposed by this Court, inter alia, directed that the petitioner must surrender his passport. He has so surrendered his passport. The petitioner now prays that the passport may be released to him so that he can return to his place of employment abroad. He is willing to abide by any appropriate conditions, it is submitted. Crl.M.C. No.3527 of 2008 2 2. The petitioner came to the bail bench of this court to modify the conditions. That bench directed that an application can be filed before the Magistrate and directed the Magistrate to consider such application. The learned Magistrate by the impugned order rejected the prayer. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. Investigation is at a very early stage. The presence of the brother of the petitioner has to be secured. He has to be interrogated. Only thereafter the investigation can be completed. Permitting the petitioner to leave India would further retard the progress of investigation. At this early stage, the petitioner may not be permitted to leave India. To facilitate that his passport may not be released to him. The police may be given further time to secure the arrest of the 2nd accused and before that the petitioner may not be permitted to leave India. That would hamper the smooth course of investigation, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is unable to ensure the appearance of his brother who is employed abroad. For that purpose he may not be Crl.M.C. No.3527 of 2008 3 compelled to remain in India. Reasonable and humane view may be taken, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. The investigation is at a very early stage. The question is not whether the petitioner can persuade his brother to surrender before the police. The only question is whether at this early stage of investigation, even before the principal co-accused is arrested, the petitioner can be permitted to leave this country and whether such permission would hamper smooth course of the investigation. I am persuaded to answer the question in favour of the prosecution. I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be permitted to leave India now and to facilitate such leaving of the petitioner, the passport cannot and need not be released to him. 6. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-