IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1671 of 2006() ------------------------- CC.631/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-V, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED -------------------- HALID, S/O. ASANARU PILLAI, AGED 45 YRS, RESIDING AT SHAJI NIVAS, T.C.18/2194 (3) ANNUR LANE, MANKUTTUKADAVU, THIRUMALA POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW AT POST BOX NO.10209, AL-HASSA, MUBARAS-31982, KINGDOM OF SOUDI ARABIA. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1671 of 2006 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia under Section 419 I.P.C and Section 12(b) of the Indian Passport Act. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner had obtained two different passports for himself showing two different names, addresses etc. Crime was registered on the basis of a complaint received from the brother-in-law of the petitioner who was residing along with him in the foreign country of his employment. He reported that the petitioner has two different passports for himself in two different names and addresses. He sent the photocopy of the relevant pages of the said passports to the police. Investigation was conducted and final report was filed raising allegations against the petitioner. 2. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2004. This Crl.M.C was filed in 2006. The same has not been admitted so far. According to the petitioner, he was arrested and produced before the learned Magistrate and was enlarged on bail. The Crl.M.C.No.1671/2006 2 petitioner has come to this court with the prayer that the proceedings against him may be quashed invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 3. What is the reason? According to the petitioner, of the two passports in this case, only one has been issued in his name. He has nothing to do with Shahul Hameed Abdul Rasheed to whom the second passport relates. He submits that the mere perusal of the photographs in the two passports reveals that the same are issued to two different persons. The mere fact that the second passport in the name of Shahul Hameed Abdul Rasheed was available in the possession of the petitioner, even if accepted to be true, cannot justify any indictment against him for the offences under Section 419 I.P.C or Section 12(b) of the Indian Passport Act. It is in these circumstances prayed that this petition may be allowed and the prosecution may be quashed. 4. I shall scrupulously avoid any detailed consideration of the contentions raised lest it may prejudice the interests of the petitioner at later stages of the trial. I need only mention that it is for the petitioner to urge his plea for discharge under Section Crl.M.C.No.1671/2006 3 239/240 Cr.P.C before the learned Magistrate. The learned gistrate at the stage of 239/240 Cr.P.C must consider the ontention of the petitioner that he is entitled to be discharged an take appropriate decision in the matter. 5. In the result, this Crl.M.C is dismissed. I may hasten to observe that I have not intended to express any opinion on the disputed questions and the learned Magistrate must consider such contentions at the stage of discharge/acquittal under the provisions of the Code. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.1671/2006 4 Crl.M.C.No.1671/2006 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008