IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1009 of 2011() ------------------------------------- CMP.NO.2040/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR. ...... (CRIME NO.204/2011 OF CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION) ..... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER:ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------- BINU,S/O.UTHAMAN,INDU BHAVANAM, THAZHAM THEKKU,CHATHANNOOR PO, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.1009 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is accused in Crime No.204 of 2011 of Chathannur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. A Mobile phone which was in the custody of petitioner was seized. He filed C.M.P. No.2040 of 2011 for release of the mobile phone. Learned Magistrate by Annexure- A1, order dismissed that petition. That order is under challenge. Learned counsel submits that the mobile phone is worth `25,000/- and if it is kept idle it will be damaged. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the request. 2. I have gone through the impugned order and find that learned Magistrate has observed that the sim card which was allegedly used by petitioner belonged to a lady by name Bindu and it is to be investigated how petitioner got the sim card which stood in the name of the said Bindu. It is also stated that there are certain other cases pending against petitioner for alleged eve teasing. In the light of the circumstances stated by the learned Magistrate I do not find reason to interfere with the order. But I CRL.M.C. No.1009 of 2011 -: 2 :- make it clear that after investigation is over, it is open to the petitioner to move fresh application before the learned Magistrate for interim custody of the mobile phone (without the sim card). If any such application is filed, Annexure-A1, order passed by the learned Magistrate or this order shall not stand in the way of learned Magistrate considering the said application and passing appropriate orders. Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of with the above direction. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv