IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2010 / 29TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3390 of 2010() ------------------------- CMP.5664/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR CRIME NO.591/2010 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): 3RD ACCUSED -------------------------- PERUMAL PARAMBIL IBRAHIM, S/O.PERUMAL PARAMBIL MOIDEENKUTTY, PERUMAL PARAMBIL HOUSE, POOKKAYIL BAZAR P.O., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2010, ALONG WITH CRL.MC NO.3391/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. Nos. 3390 and 3391 OF 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2010 ORDER The common petitioner in these cases is the common 3rd accused in Crime Nos.591/2010 and 592/2010 of Tirur Police Station. In Crime No.591/2010 the offences are those punishable under Sections 353, 332 and 283 read with 34 IPC and in Crime No.592/2010 the offences are those punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 283, 324, 341 and 308 IPC. While granting bail, the learned Magistrate had directed him to surrender his passport. Accordingly, he had surrendered his passport. Subsequently, the petitioner moved the Magistrate for release of his passport on the ground that if he does not resume his employment abroad, he will lose his job. The learned Magistrate was not inclined to allow the applications, which were accordingly dismissed as per common Annexure-VI order in both the Criminal M.Cs. 2. After hearing both sides, I am of the view that the petitioner does not deserve dismissal of his application to release his passport at least for a period of one year within which time it is unlikely that the above cases may come up for Crl.M.C. No.3390 & 3391 OF 2010 : 2 : trial. Accordingly, the petitioner is given permission to go abroad in terms of the decision in Ashok Kumar v. State of Kerala 2009 (2) KLT 712 . This permission is given in the aforesaid two crimes. The passport of the petitioner shall be released for a period of one year to enable him to go abroad on his executing a bond before the Magistrate and on such conditions as the Magistrate may impose and on undertaking to return the passport after one year. The petitioner shall also leave his local address as well as his address abroad and also the address and telephone number of his local Advocate before executing the bond. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb