Madras High Court
A.Chitra Prasanna vs The Superintendent Of Police on 9 November, 2023
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:09.11.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD).No.23216 of 2023
A.Chitra Prasanna ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Director (Immigration),
Bureau of Immigration,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India,
East Block-8,
Level-4, Sector-1,
R.K.Puram,
New Delhi-110066.
3.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.21 of 2021) ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 04.11.2023 in
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
Crl.M.P.No.12309 of 2023 in C.C.No.347 of 2023 on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi and quash the same as illegal
and consequently directing the first and third respondents police to
withdraw the look out circular as against the petitioner for securing his
job in Finland and from preventing him for travelling abroad and
detaining and arresting him in any immigration (entry or exit) point in
India and interfering with his freedom of movement without or without
India.
For Petitioner : Mr.Benazir Begum
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned order dated
04.11.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.12309 of 2023 in C.C.No.347 of 2023 on the
file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi and consequently to
direct the respondents 1 and 3 to withdraw the look out circular as
against the petitioner for securing job in Finland and from preventing the
petitioner for travelling abroad and detaining and arresting the petitioner
in any immigration (entry or exit) point in India.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
2.The petitioner is facing charges under Sections 498 (A) and
294(b) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of
Women Act, 2002 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. In the
trial process, totally there are four accused. Among four accused, this
petitioner is the second accused, shown as absconding. He moved
anticipatory bail application before this Court in Crl.O.P(MD).No.17275
of 2023. That was also considered by this Court and granted anticipatory
bail to the petitioner with condition. The above said condition was also
complied by the petitioner on 26.10.2023.
3.Pending the trial process, look out notice was issued against the
petitioner. That was also challenged before this Court for filing writ
petition in W.P.(MD).No.25416 of 2023. That was also considered and
directed the petitioner to move application before the concerned Court
seeking permission to visit abroad on his job nature. In pursuance of the
above said order, the petitioner approached the trial Court by filing
Crl.M.P.No.12309 of 2023 in C.C.No.347 of 2023 that was heard by the
trial Court noting that the trial commenced, if the petitioner is permitted
to go abroad, it will hamper the trial process, the petitioner may not
return to India, on that ground, the trial Court did not incline to allow the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
petition. The petitioner also filed quash petition in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.
18951 of 2023. It is also seen that the petitioner filed a miscellaneous
petition in Crl.M.P.(MD).No.14972 of 2023 seeking dispensing his
personal appearance before the trial Court. That was also considered by
this Court with some conditions, he was ordered to file an undertaking
affidavit before the trial by affixing his recent photograph undertaking
that he will appear before the trial Court as and when required. But the
above said order copy is not made ready till today, so he could not
comply with the order as on today.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the said order will also be complied with by the petitioner in due
course. The petitioner is also present in person before this Court and
stated that in spite of the best attempt to resolve the issue, the defacto
complainant did not come forward to make settle the issue. They got
child of 11 years old under the custody of the mother. Even now, he is
ready to take the family but only the wife is not responding properly.
The matter was already referred to mediation, while hearing the petition
in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17275 of 2023 and the mediation process is stated to
be pending. But the defacto complainant is not responding to mediation
process.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
5.In the light of the above said situation, right of the petitioner to
visit abroad on his job basis cannot be curtailed totally. His presence
before the trial Court may be ensured by imposing certain condition,
since right to process abroad is recognized in Maneka Gandhi Vs.
Union of India (UOI) and others reported in MANU/SC/0133/1978:
(1978) 1 SCC 248.
6.On that ground, the order dated 04.11.2023, in Crl.M.P.No.12309
of 2023 in C.C.No.347 of 2023, passed by the trial Court is set aside and
the petitioner is permitted to go abroad on his job nature and must ensure
that he will be represented by an Advocate during the trial process. On
that ground the petitioner should desist from cross examining the witness
in his absence. Apart from that, the petitioner is directed to share his
mobile phone number and address details with the respondent police and
must keep in touch with them once 15 days through phone call. The
petitioner is directed to be present before the trial Court at the time of
questioning and pronouncing judgment. If any one of the conditions is
violated, steps may be taken to secure his presence by the trial Court. The
petitioner has also filed undertaking affidavit before this Court. Let the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
above said undertaking affidavit be produced before the Registry in a
proper manner. The petitioner is permitted to visit abroad as noted above
and he must return to India at the time of Section 313 Cr.P.C.,
questioning. The supporting affidavit also filed by two persons to ensure
compliance of the conditions.
7.With the above said directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed.
No costs. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petition is
closed.
09.11.2023
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/ No
VSG
Note:Issue Order Copy on 09.11.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Director (Immigration),
Bureau of Immigration,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India,
East Block-8,
Level-4, Sector-1,
R.K.Puram,
New Delhi-110066.
3.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
G.ILANGOVAN, J
VSG
Order made in
W.P(MD)No.27040 of 2023
Dated :09.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
