Kerala High Court
Vishnuraj vs State Of Kerala on 8 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942
Crl.MC.No.712 OF 2021(H)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 80/2019 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT - II, NORTH PARAVUR
PETITIONER:
VISHNURAJ
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O.RAJEEV,MANDAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKEPRAM KARA,
THATHAPILLY P.O., PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.A.M.UMAR NASEEF
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PIN- 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
PP T.R.RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.712 OF 2021
2
ORDER
Dated this the 8th day of February 2021
Petitioner is the first appellant in Crl. Appeal
No.80/ 2019 on the files of the Additional District and
Sessions Court II, North Paravur. The appeal is filed
challenging the judgment by which the petitioner was
convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable
under Sections 308 and 324 read with Section 34 of
IPC. The petitioner had filed Crl.M.P. No.247/2020
before the appellate court, seeking a direction to the
Passport Authority to process his application and to
issue passport and on the passport being issued, to
permit the petitioner to go abroad. The application was
opposed by the prosecution, pointing out the possibility
of the petitioner absconding, if permitted to leave the
Country. The application was rejected by the appellate
court and hence, this Crl.M.C.
2. A perusal of the impugned order shows that,
when the application came up for consideration, the
Crl.MC.No.712 OF 2021
appellate court had expressed its willingness to hear
and dispose the appeal. Further, on 04.01.2021, the
Counsel for the petitioner as well as the Public
Prosecutor also expressed willingness to get ready for
hearing the appeal finally. Thereupon, the appeal was
posted to 12.01.2021. But, on 12.01.2021, Counsel for
the petitioner insisted that the application for issuance
of passport should be heard first. The appellate court
found such insistence to be baseless, since the appeal
itself was ripe for hearing and hence, dismissed the
application.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner
submitted that merely for reason of the appeal being
ripe for hearing, there was no impediment in allowing
the application for issuance of passport, particularly
since the offences alleged are only under Sections 308
and 324 of IPC.
I am unable to accept the contention, since, no
prejudice will be caused to the petitioner, by the appeal
being taken up and decided first. It is pertinent to note
Crl.MC.No.712 OF 2021
that no specific reason for leaving the Country urgently
was submitted in the application. Being so, the
petitioner cannot insist that his application ought to
have been considered and the petitioner permitted to
leave the Country, pending the appeal.
For the aforementioned reasons, the Crl.M.C. is
dismissed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
NB
Crl.MC.No.712 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF
CRL.M.P.NO.247/2020 OF THE II-ADDL.DIST.
AND SESSIONS COURT, N.PARAVUR.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
