Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Sharafudheen vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala|19 June, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Petitioner is accused in Crime No.325 of 2007 of the Chandera Police station for the offences punishable under Secs.465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, Secs.12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, apprehends arrest and has filed the application. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that the petitioner applied for a passport on the strength of forged school certificate and election ID card.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner had taken passport in the year, 1984, went to Muscat, renewed it from the Indian Embassy on 22.08.2004 and it is valid till 21.08.2014. It is submitted that the petitioner had no necessity or occasion to apply for a fresh passport. It is also submitted that somebody may have applied for the passport in the name of the petitioner. Petitioner has not signed any application.
4. I am inclined to think that the matter requires investigation. The investigating officer may have to collect materials from the petitioner. In the circumstances, request for pre arrest bail cannot be allowed but, I am inclined to issue directions.
Application is disposed of as under.
1. Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.325 of 2007 of the Chandera Police station on 04.07.2014 at 10.00 am for interrogation.
2. In case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply.
3. Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
4. In case petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day where it is open to the petitioner to request for bail with intimation given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned at least three working days in advance.
5. If custody of the petitioner is required for any purpose, the investigating officer also can move application before the learned magistrate.
6. Learned magistrate shall consider the application(s) having regard to all relevant circumstances including whether custody of the petitioner is required for any purpose and pass appropriate orders as early as possible.
Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sharafudheen vs State Of Kerala

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
19 June, 2014
Judges
  • Thomas P Joseph
Advocates
  • M Sasindran Sri
  • A Arunkumar