Kerala High Court
Stanly Simon vs State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 1ST PHALGUNA,
1945
CRL.MC NO. 1639 OF 2024
CRIME NO.510/2011 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,
PATHANAMTHITTA
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 172/2012 OF CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 5 :
1 STANLY SIMON, AGED 37 YEARS
S/O SIMON C. THOMAS, ASSANPARAMBIL HOUSE,
PAZHAMPALAKKAD MURI, PAZHAMPALAKKAD VILLAGE,
THAROOR-1, ALATHOOR TALUK,
PALAKKADU DISTRICT., PIN - 678 544.
2 ZEENATH STANLY, AGED 42 YEARS
W/O STANLY SIMON, ASSANPARAMBIL HOUSE,
PAZHAMPALAKKAD MURI, PAZHAMPALAKKAD VILLAGE,
THAROOR-1, ALATHOOR TALUK, PALAKKADU
DISTRICT., PIN - 678 544.
BY ADVS.
K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)
AMRUTHA KALYANI P.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE :
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V. (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 1639 OF 2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......................................................
CRL.M.C No.1639 of 2024
...................................................
Dated this the 20th day of February, 2024
ORDER
Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 5 in C.C.No.172/2012 on the
files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Pathanamthitta,
arising out of Crime No.510/2011 of Pathanamthitta Police
Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420
r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from
Sections 10 and 24 of the Emigration Act, 1983.
2. The prosecution allegation is that, the nine accused persons had
cheated witnesses 2 to 4 by promising to provide them
employment abroad after collecting money, and thereafter failed
to arrange their visas and even refused to return the money, and
thereby committed the offences alleged.
3. While the case is pending before the trial court, petitioners' filed
applications for dispensing with their personal presence, under
Section 205 of Cr.P.C. Those applications were dismissed by the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, as per Annexure-A4 and
CRL.MC NO. 1639 OF 2024
Annexure-A5 orders. The reason for dismissal was stated to be
the pendency of non-bailable warrants issued against them.
4. The pendency of a non bailable warrant by itself is not a reason
to deny the request for personal exemption. However, the
learned Magistrate has given specific reasons for not allowing the
exemption applications filed by the petitioners. I am of the view
that there is no perversity in the impugned orders, which
warrants interference under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
5. In this context, this Court is aware that petitioners were granted
personal exemption in 30 other cases, and they are appearing
through the counsel in those cases. This Court also notices that,
in five cases, the learned Magistrate has refused to grant personal
exemption. No reasons have also been stated by petitioners for
seeking personal exemption, except that the first petitioner is
suffering from throat cancer. However, the said claims is based
on a certificate issued in 2020 and February 2023. There is
nothing to indicate that the said illness continues even now, to
the extent of disabling the first petitioner from appearing in
Court. Therefore, I am not satisfied that the impugned orders
CRL.MC NO. 1639 OF 2024
warrant interference.
6. Nevertheless, since the non-bailable warrants are pending against
the petitioners, it is directed that, if any applications for recall of
warrant and for grant of bail, are filed by petitioners without
delay, the learned Magistrate shall issue appropriate orders
positively, on the date of appearance itself. It is also clarified
that, notwithstanding the dismissal of the applications for personal
exemption, the learned Magistrate will be at liberty to consider
the application for dispensing with the personal appearance of the
petitioners, if such applications are filed, after petitioners appear
before the court and the warrants are recalled.
7. To enable the petitioners to appear before the trial court, as
directed above, coercive proceedings in C.C.No.172/2012 on the
files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Pathanamthitta, shall
be kept in abeyance for a period of 15 days from today.
With the above observations, this Crl.M.C.is dismissed.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/24/02/2024
CRL.MC NO. 1639 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.C 172 /2012
OF THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 13.09.2012.
ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED
30.09.2020 ISSUED FROM THE AMRUTHA
INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, ERNAKULUM
TO THE FIRST PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE 3 THE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED
07.02. 2023 ISSUED FROM THE AMRUTHA
INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, ERNAKULUM
TO THE FIRST PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE 4 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL. MP
NO. 819/2023 IN CC 172/2012 BY THE CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PATHANAMTHITTA, DATED
16.02.2023.
ANNEXURE 5 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL. MP
NO. 818/2023 IN CC 172/2012 BY THE CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PATHANAMTHITTA, DATED
16.02.2023.
TRUE COPY
