Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MUHAMMEDKUTTY versus THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MUHAMMEDKUTTY v. THE STATE OF KERALA - Bail Appl No. 5186 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 613 (29 August 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5186 of 2006()

1. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O. ABDURAHIMAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.M.JAMES

Dated :29/08/2006

O R D E R

J.M.JAMES, J.

B.A. 5186/2006

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2006

O R D E R

The petitioner is the third accused, in crime No. 440/2006 of Chengamanad Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 468 and 471 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and also under Section 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act.

2. The prosecution allegation is that accused Nos. 1 and 2 had handed over their passports to arrange their travel abroad. The third accused, who received an amount of Rs.36,300/- from each accused, handed over the money as well as the passports to the fourth accused, who is conducting a travel agency named 'M/s. Riya Travel and Tours (India) Private Limited'. On the date of travelling to Mascot for employment, it was offered that the passport would be handed over to them in the International Airport, Kochi, at the time of travelling. Just before the taking off, passports were accordingly handed B.A.5186/2006 2 over, by the fourth accused. At the time of clearance, it was found that an entry was detected in the passport as 'Emigration Clearance Not Required'(ECNR). That was found to be forged. Therefore, both the accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested and their job opportunities abroad were also spoiled.

3. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that he had not done anything and he had only handed over the money as well as passports to the fourth accused.

4. In the facts situation of the case, I direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer of Chengamanad Police Station, on 11.9.2006 between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. The Investigating Officer shall interrogate the petitioner and produce him before the Court below, as per the law.

5. The petitioner may move an application for bail and the learned Magistrate, after hearing both sides, shall pass orders on the same day itself, on merit. If an application for custodial interrogation is filed by the B.A.5186/2006 3 Investigating Officer, it may also be considered, along with the bail application, and pass orders on merit. The application is disposed of as above. J.M.JAMES

mrcs JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.