IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 14412 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ABU KALATHIL, (NOW IN THE HOSPITAL), KALATHIL HOUSE, KONNARAM, THIRUVIZHAMKUNNU POST, MANNARCAUD TALUK, REPRESENTED THOUGH HIS SON (POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER) ABDUL KARIM, KALATHIL HOUSE, KONNARAM, THIRUVIZHAMKUNNU POST, MANNARCAUD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.ABDUL SALAM SRI.ABU KALATHIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NATTUKAL POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. KALATHIL ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. LATE KUNJAHAMMED, KALATHIL HOUSE, KONNARAM, THIRUVIZHAMKUNNU POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. ABDUL RASHEED, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, S/O. LATE KUNJAHAMMED, KALATHIL HOUSE, KONNARAM, THIRUVIZHAMKUNNU POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI C.K.SURESH KUMAR SHRI V.G.GOVINDAN NAIR - DIREC TOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTIONS ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN FOR R3 & 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 14412 OF 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. S.Abdul Salam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.K.Suresh Kumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: (a) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents 1 & 2 to impound the passport and other travel documents of the respondents 3 & 4 till the investigation complete and file report to the court concerned. (b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the complaint to the police and further proceedings with regard to the commission of criminal action by the respondents 3&4. (c) Award the cost of this petition to the petitioner.” 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that respondents 3 and 4, who are arrayed as the accused in S.T. No.1745 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mannarkkad, had gone abroad while the sand case was pending against them that they are now back in India and notwithstanding the fact that W.P.(C) No. 14412/07 2 respondents 3 and 4 are involved in a criminal case, the official respondents are not taking steps to impound their passports and to prevent them from leaving the jurisdiction of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, where they are being prosecuted. 4. In my opinion, respondents 1 and 2 cannot impound the passports issued to respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 1 and 2 can only inform the Passport Officer concerned that respondents 3 and 4 are involved in a criminal case, which is pending trial. The petitioner can also bring this matter to the notice of the trial Magistrate by filing an appropriate application. That being the situation, I am of the opinion that no orders are called for in this writ petition. It is accordingly closed, reserving liberty with the petitioner to move the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mannarkkad, where S.T. No.1745 of 2007 is pending or the Passport Officer, who has issued passports to respondents 3 and 4 seeking appropriate orders. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps W.P.(C) No. 14412/07 3