IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 6TH MAY 2010 / 16TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14413 of 2010(Q) -------------------------- CMP NO.2599/2010 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V,KOZHIKODE CC.497/2002 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V,KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- SAJI ALIAS FAISAL, S/O.MUHAMMED KAZIM, AGED 24 YEARS, THEKKUMPURA HOUSE, KALLITHODI, FEROKE AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ SMT.M.SHAJNA RESPONDENT(S): STATE: --------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI B.JAYASURYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.14413 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 6 th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T This Petition is in challenge of the order passed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode in C.M.P. No.2599 of 2010 as per which the learned Magistrate refused to release the passport produced by the petitioner in that court. Petitioner was accused in C.C. No.497 of 2002 of that court. He was convicted and sentenced for various offences. He preferred appeal No.182 of 2008 and sought suspension of sentence. Appellate court directed petitioner to surrender passport in the trial court and accordingly passport was produced in that court. According to the petitioner, the appeal was allowed and he was acquitted of all charges levelled against him. Hence he is entitled to get back the passport produced in the trial court. It is for the said purpose that petitioner filed C.M.P. No.2599 of 2010. That petition was dismissed by the trial court stating that since passport was surrendered as per the order of the appellate court, order for release of passport has to be obtained from that court. According to learned counsel since appeal was allowed, the interim W.P(C) No.14413 of 2010 -: 2 :- order for surrender of passport goes and the trial court was competent to release the passport. 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents. 3. I am afraid the contention raised by learned counsel cannot be accepted. Trial court is only a custodian of the passport produced before it as per the direction of the appellate court. Since order for release of the passport has not come from that court, proper remedy of the petitioner was as stated by learned Magistrate to, approach the appellate court for release of the passport. Therefore I do not find reason to interfere with the impugned order (a copy of which is not produced). Learned counsel for petitioner requested that direction may be given to the learned Magistrate to issue a certified photocopy of the passport so that based on the same he can apply for extension of Visa. I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to apply for certified copy of the passport before the learned Magistrate and if that application is in order and issue of certified copy of passport is permissible under law, request of the petitioner will be considered by the learned Magistrate. It will also be open to the petitioner to W.P(C) No.14413 of 2010 -: 3 :- approach the appellate court and seek orders for release of the passport if it is not required to be detained for any other purpose. Writ Petition is dismissed with the above observation. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv