IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 392 of 2011() ------------------------ CRMP.52/2011 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MOHAMMED KUNHI C.A, AGED 5 YEARS, S/O.LATE ABDUL KHADER MUSALIYAR,RESIDING AT SUMAYYA MANZIL, CHEMBIRIKA, KALANAD,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, SPECIAL CRIME BRANCH, THRIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, CBI HEAD QUARTERS, NEW DELHI. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. P. CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, SC, CBI R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.392 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioner challenges Annexure-3 dated 17.01.2011 on Crl.M.P.No.52 of 2011 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. Petitioner who is an NRI businessman wanted his passport seized by the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short, “the CBI”) in the course of investigation to be released to him so that he could go abroad in connection with business. Request was opposed by the CBI and learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by Annexure-3, order refused to order return of the passport. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that this is a case where petitioner is not even implicated, for no reason whatsoever he is detained and his passport is kept in custody. According to the learned counsel on account of inability to go abroad his business is affected and his status as NRI will also be affected. I have heard learned Standing Counsel for the CBI. It is submitted that body of the deceased was found in a hillock where the deceased who had physical inability could not have gone alone, a letter was recovered from the room, that has been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for report and that report is not received. It also submitted by learned Standing Counsel on getting instruction from the CBI that Crl.MC No.392/2011 2 the Investigating Agency suspects involvement of petitioner also and that in such a situation if petitioner is permitted to go abroad that may affect further investigation of the case. 2. Case is that the father in law of petitioner was found dead in suspicious circumstances on 15.02.2010. Deceased was the president of Malabar Islamic Religious Institute, Kasaragod. Initial investigation was conducted by the local Police and later it was handed over to the CBI. 3. It is true that detention of passport of petitioner may affect him adversely but, I am to consider the consequence of release of passport as well. At the crucial stage of investigation if a person on whom investigating team have their own suspicion is allowed to go abroad and is not available for further investigation that may have a bearing on proper investigation by the agency concerned. In the circumstances I am not persuaded to think that learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was not correct in refusing to order release of the passport to the petitioner. But, I make it clear that the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and this order will not stand in the way of petitioner making a fresh application for the same relief at a latter stage. If any such application is Crl.MC No.392/2011 3 received learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon after hearing the objection of the CBI. The CBI shall take steps to get the report of Forensic Science Laboratory on the letter as early as possible. Petition is closed with the above observation. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks