IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2009 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1552 of 2009(F) ----------------------------------- CRIME NO.57 OF 2007 OF NORTH PARAVUR POLICE STION PETITIONER(S): 6TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------------- SMITH, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 28 YEARS, NEELAMBARI HOUSE, VIP COLONY, MANNAM KARA, PARAVUR VILLAGE. BY MR. S.RAJEEV, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY MR.KAMAPPU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dkr M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No. 1552 of 2009-F ================== Dated this the 29th day of May, 2009. O R D E R Petitioner is the sixth accused in Crime No.57/2007 of North Paravur Police Station. Offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. When petitioner was arrested, a Nokia mobile phone along with cash and wrist watch were seized by the Police and produced before the Magistrate under T.No.180/2009. Petitioner filed Annexure 1 petition under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure to release the mobile phone as well as cash and wrist watch. Under Annexure 2 order, learned Magistrate directed release of the articles seized except the mobile phone. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for a direction to the Magistrate to release the mobile phone. Crl.M.C.No.1552/2009 -2- 2. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that the investigating officer could collect the entire details available in the mobile phone and thereafter the mobile phone can be released to petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner is working in Gulf and his entire personal details are there in the mobile phone and such details are absolutely necessary for the petitioner. It is submitted that under such circumstances, the mobile phone may be released to the petitioner or in the alternative, the details available in the mobile phone may be permitted to be take down by the petitioner. 4. The Public Prosecutor opposed the application submitting that the mobile phone is a material object necessary at the time of trial and in such circumstance it cannot be released. 5. The case of the petitioner is that details stored in the mobile phone are necessary for him as they relate to his Crl.M.C.No.1552/2009 -3- employment particulars in Gulf Countries. If that alone is the grievances of the petitioner, when prosecution case is that the mobile phone is a material object necessary for proving the prosecution case, if the petitioner is permitted to take details stored in the mobile phone from the Court in the presence of the investigating officer, it would serve the purpose. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that petitioner is satisfied if he is permitted to take down the details. 6. In such circumstances, petition is disposed directing Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, North Paravur to permit the petitioner to take down the details stored in the mobile phone seized from the petitioner and produced before the Court as T.No.180/2009 in the presence of investigating officer. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr