IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9444 OF 2018 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6349 OF 2018 In Crl.P.No.9444/2018 Between:
Syed Moizuddin, S/o Naseeruddin.S.M, Aged about 35 years, R/at No.400/F, 3rd Main, 1st Cross, Near Ithihad Hotel, Siddiqui Nagar, Mysuru City-570015. Also at No.264, 5th Main, C Layout, 1st Floor, Bannimantapa, Mysuru-570 015.
Presently at No.139, Jabal Saqalia Street, A1 Fayhaa District, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Riyadh-A Sulay. ... Petitioner (By Sri.Prabhugoud B.Tumbigi, Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka By Women Police Station, Mysuru, Rep by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the order of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru dated 06.10.2018 on interim application filed under section 70 of the Criminal Procedure Code read with Sec.10(3) of The Passport Act filed by the respondent, in C.C.No.7754/2016 and consequently dismiss the application of the respondent therein.
In Crl.P.No.6349 OF 2018 Between:
1. Syed Moizuddin S/o. Naseeruddin S.M, Aged about 34 years, Presently residing at No. 139, Jabal Saqalia Street, A1 Fayhaa District, Kingdom of Soudi Arabia, Riyadh-A-Sulay.
Old Address: No.400/F, III Main, 1st Cross, Near Ithihad Hotel, Siddiquia Nagar, Mysuru City - 570 015 2. Smt. Shahanaz Begum W/o. Syed Hammed Naseeruddin, Aged about 64 years, 3. Syed Hameed Naseeruddin Sha Khadri S/o.Late Syed Hameed Imaduddin, Aged about 74 years, All presently residing at:
No. 264, 5th Main, C-Layout, 1st Floor, Bannimantapa, Mysuru – 570 015. ... Petitioners (By Sri. Prabhugoud B.Tumbigi, Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka By Women Police Station, Mysuru.
Rep by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru-560001.
2. Smt. Noorain Fathima Aged about 32 years, D/o. Mohammad Fazlur Rehaman, 25/15, 3rd Cross, Kanakapura Main Road, Shakambari Nagar, 1st Stage, JP Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 070. ... Respondents (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP for R1) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioners who are the accused No.1 to 4 in C.C.No.7754/2016 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru for the alleged offence u/s 498A r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3,4 of D.P Act registered by the Women Police, Mysuru and dismiss the complaint and etc.
These Criminal Petitions coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Though these two petitions are listed for admission by consent of learned Advocates, it is taken up for final disposal. Insofar as issuance of notice to respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.6349/2018 is concerned, stands dispensed with.
2. Sri.Prabhugoud B.Tumbigi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has fairly submitted that he would not press prayer No.(i) which is for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.7754/2016. Hence, notice to respondent No.2 has been dispensed with in Crl.P.No.6349/2018. Petitioner is accused No.1 in C.C.No.7754/2016 which proceedings are pending against petitioner and other accused for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3. The learned trial Judge by order dated 13.10.2016 has permitted the petitioner-accused No.1 to leave India since petitioner is gainfully employed at Saudi Arabia and is said to be traveling to India quite often to attend the proceedings before trial Court. Passport has issued to the petitioner by the Regional Passport Authority, Bengaluru. On the ground of absence of 1st petitioner- 1st accused before trial Court on 24.02.2018 and 24.03.2018, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application under Section 70 of Cr.P.C read with Section 10(3) of The Passport Act, 1967 seeking for a direction to intimate the Regional Passport Authority about issuance of non bailable warrant against accused No.1. The records would also disclose that petitioner-accused No.1 was present before trial Court on 24.02.2018 and 24.03.2018. Even the complainant whose deposition came to be recorded was also present on 24.02.2018. But for the reason put forth by both the parties that matter is pending before Family Court for mediation, it was adjourned to 20.04.2018, on which date accused No.1 has remained absent. However, exemption application came to be filed on behalf of accused No.1 has been rejected by noticing that accused No.1 has returned back to Saudi Arabia without intimating the Court. Hence, trial Judge has allowed the application filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor and has directed issuance of non bailable warrant (NBW) against accused No.1 and has also directed the Registry to intimate the issuance of non bailable warrant against accused No.1 to Regional Passport Authority, Though impugned order dated 06.10.2018 cannot be found fault with, in as much as Section 10(3)(h) of The Passport Act, 1967 would indicate that in the event of warrant of arrest is issued against a passport holder and this fact is brought to the notice of Regional Passport Authority and Regional Passport Authority being satisfied that a warrant or summons has been so issued or an order has been made would empower said Authority to impound the passport or cause to be impound or revoke the passport or traveling document so issued to such person against whom warrant has been issued. Thus, learned trial Judge has only ordered for Regional passport Authority being intimated about non bailable warrant issued against petitioner which has remained unexecuted. However, Sri.Prabhugoud B.Tumbigi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner No.1 has made a statement at the bar that on account of work exigencies petitioner had proceeded to Saudi Arabia and not with an intention to absent himself from Court. He would undertake to appear before the learned trial Judge without fail during the first week of May, 2019. His submission is placed on record.
4. In that view of the matter, ends of justice would be met if impugned order is ordered to remain in suspended animation and the Registry of trial Court shall also intimate of impugned order not being in force or in currency till appearance of the petitioner before learned trial Judge as ordered by this Court, which would enable the petitioner to return to India. It is made clear that on such appearance of petitioner before the learned trial Judge during first week of May, 2019, trial Court shall immediately record the evidence of remaining witnesses on behalf of petitioner and shall expeditiously within one month from date of commencement of trial conclude the trial. Thereafter, trial Court shall dispose of the matter expeditiously on merits.
5. It is made clear that impugned order dated 06.10.2018 shall remain in suspended animation and the Registry of this Court shall intimate the Regional Passport Authority, order passed by this Court, keeping the impugned order in suspended animation till appearance of accused before trial Court.
In the light of aforesaid order, non bailable warrant issued against petitioner is recalled and petitioner would be at liberty to appear before the trial Court as undertake and without fail. Accordingly, Crl. Petition No.9444/2018 stands disposed of.
Criminal Petition No.6349/2018 does not survive for consideration in the light of connected matter Crl. Petition No.9444/2018 having been disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE UN