IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2009 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1866 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CMP.896/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------ YASAR ARAFATH, S/O.SAITHU, DAYA MANZIL, CHERUVATH, VAKAYAD P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.SATHYASHREE PRIYA. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 1866 of 2009 ORDER ON CRL. MA. NO.3093/2009 IN CRL. MC.NO.1866/2009. DISMISSED 17/06/2009. SD/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 1866 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 17th day of June,2009 ORDER Petitioner filed C.M.P.896/2009 before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Aluva under section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure for interim custody of his passport, visa and ticket which were seized by the police when he arrived at Nedumbassery Airport from Soudhi Arabia. Learned Magistrate dismissed the application under Annexure 6 order. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure 6 order and to get interim custody of the passport. 2. Learned counsel counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the correction in the passport is only with regard to the year of birth namely 1986 was corrected as 1982 and it was not done by the petitioner but by the travel agent and in such circumstance petitioner is entitled to get back the Crl.M.C.1866/2009 2 passport. Learned counsel submitted that unless he gets interim custody of the passport, he cannot return to Soudhi Arabia and if so will loose the job and therefore interim custody is to be granted. Learned counsel also pointed out that for an offence under section 12(1)(b) (d) of Passport Act petitioner could only be sentenced to fine and in such circumstance petitioner may be granted interim custody of the passport and he is prepared to abide by the conditions. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and submitted that in addition to the offence under the Passport Act, case is being investigated for the offences under sections 468,419 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and when it is clear that there is unauthorised correction of year of birth in the passport, petitioner cannot be allowed to make use of that passport and as the passport is necessary as a material object to be proved in the case, interim custody cannot be granted. 5. I find force in the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor. When it is prima facie shown that correction had been effected to in the passport obtained by the petitioner with regard to the year of birth and the case is being investigated for the offence under section 468 and 471, petitioner cannot be granted interim custody of the same passport. In any event petitioner cannot be allowed Crl.M.C.1866/2009 3 to make use of the passport where correction is made. Learned counsel then submitted that there may be a direction to the Magistrate to dispose the case before August,2009. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case is still under investigation and report of the expert is awaited. In such circumstance, no direction could be issued to dispose the case as sought for. The question of disposal arises only after taking cognizance on filing the final report. The Investigating Officer is directed to expedite the investigation. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006