Karnataka High Court
Mr Francis Zavier Crasto vs State Of Karnataka on 21 June, 2023
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:21400
CRL.P No. 4781 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4781 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MR. FRANCIS ZAVIER CRASTO,
S/O SYLVESTER PETER CRASTO,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NO.15, 2ND FLOOR,
YUNUS BUILDING,
TRINITY STREET,
MUMBAI - 2.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. KARIAPPA N. A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION,
Digitally signed
by PADMAVATHI BANGALORE - 560 064.
BK
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
KARNATAKA STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560 001)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05.05.2023
PASSED IN S.C.NO.90/2015 ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL
DISTRICT, BENGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:21400
CRL.P No. 4781 of 2023
CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE HONOURABLE COURT BELOW TO
DELIVER THE TWO PASSPORTS MARKED AS EXHIBIT P-17 AND
EXHIBIT P-18 WHICH WERE SUBJECTED TO PF.NO.39/2015 TO
THE PETITIONER AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an
order dated 05.05.2023 passed in S.C.No.90/2015 rejecting an
application filed under Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. seeking
release of Exhibits P17 and P18, which were passports that
were made subject matter of the PF.No.39/2015.
2. Heard Sri. Hashmath Pasha, learned Senior counsel
for Sri. Kariappa N.A., learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Sri. Mahesh Shetty, learned HCGP appearing for
the respondent.
3. The petitioner gets embroiled in a crime, in crime
No.72/2015 and pursuant to the said registration of the crime,
passports of the petitioner was seized and subjected to
PF.No.39/2015 and marked in S.C.No.90/2015 as Exhibits P17
and P18. The Sessions Court in terms of the order dated
12.04.2023, acquits the petitioner, but does not pass any order
NC: 2023:KHC:21400
CRL.P No. 4781 of 2023
under Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. with regard to the passports
that was seized as aforesaid. This drives the petitioner to file
an application invoking Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. for return of
the passports. The concerned Court rejects the application on
the ground that the appeal period for preferring an appeal
against the order of acquittal, is yet to get over, and therefore,
it cannot be released. It is this order that drives the petitioner
to this Court in the subject petition.
4. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner would submit that Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. does
not empower such orders to be passed by the concerned Court
on the ground that an appeal would be filed in future and
therefore, the articles that are seized, which are subject matter
of the PF cannot be released.
5. The submission of the learned counsel though is
sought to be refuted by the learned HCGP, he would admit that
such an order would not be within the power under Section 452
of the Cr.P.C.
6. The issue now lies in a narrow compass. The
acquittal of the petitioner is not in dispute, as it is in terms of
NC: 2023:KHC:21400
CRL.P No. 4781 of 2023
order dated 12.04.2023, while so doing no order is passed with
regard to P.F.No.39/2015, which were the passports of the
petitioner. An application comes to be filed for such release
and the application comes to be rejected by the concerned
Court observing as follows:
"REASONS
6. The accuse has filed the instant application
to release his passports seized by the complainant police
in PF.No.39/2015. It is pertinent to mention here that
the judgment was passed by this court on 12.04.2023.
Hence, the appeal period is not yet over. The application
filed by the accused for release of his passports is
premature. The said passports cannot be released to the
custody of the accused till the appeal period is over.
Further, the prosecution has filed objections stating that
they have applied for certified copy of the judgment
passed by this court and they are in the process of
taking a decision whether to file appeal or not against
the judgment passed by this court. In the
circumstances, the instant application filed by the
accused is not maintainable at this stage.
Accordingly, this point is answered in the
Negative
ORDER
The application filed by the accused u/s.452 of
Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected. However, liberty is granted to
the accused to move the application for release of his
passports after the appeal period is over."
7. The reason so rendered on the face of it is
erroneous, as the passport that are seized cannot be withheld
after the acquittal of the petitioner merely because an appeal
NC: 2023:KHC:21400
CRL.P No. 4781 of 2023
would be filed against the said order. Therefore, an order
dated 05.05.2023 stands quashed.
The concerned Court is directed to release the passports
in favour of the petitioner, which are subject matter of
PF.No.39/2015, forthwith.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JY
CT:PH
