SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 1759

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
A. Badharudeen, J.
S.Anitha – Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation, Represented By The Deputy Superintendent of Police – Respondent
Crl.R.P.Nos.630 and 633 of 2025
Decided On : 07-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri.C.S.Manu, Shri.S.K.Premraj, Smt.V.Saritha, Sri.Dilu Joseph, Sri.C.A.Anupaman, Shri.T.B.Sivaprasad, Smt.Neethu.K.Shaji, Sri.C.Y.Vijay Kumar, Smt.Manju E.R., Shri.Alint Joseph, Shri.Paul Jose, Smt.Dainy Davis, Shri.Mahesh Kumar K.
For the Respondent: Spl. Public Prosecutor, Sreelal.N.Warrier

IMPORTANT POINT
The necessity of establishing only a prima facie case for framing charges in conspiracy cases, allowing for prosecution to proceed based on suspicion rather than conclusive proof.

Headnote:

(A) Delhi Special Establishment Act - Section 5 - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 227 and 228 - Criminal conspiracy - Accused involved in organized trafficking and illegal emigration of passengers without valid documents - Dismissal of discharge petition upheld as sufficient prima facie material exists for framing charges against accused - The trial court found that the evidence indicated involvement of accused in conspiracy and illegal activities at the emigration counter, thus justifying the framing of charges. (Paras 8 , 11 , 12 )

(B) Criminal Conspiracy - The necessity of establishing a prima facie case for framing charges - The court emphasized that mere suspicion suffices to proceed against accused, not the sufficiency of evidence for conviction at this stage. (Paras 11 , 12 )

Facts of the case:

The accused, including police officials and a travel agent, were alleged to have conspired to facilitate illegal emigration of passengers by accepting bribes and clearing individuals without proper documentation, impacting the integrity of the immigration process. (Paras 3 , 4 , 6 )

Findings of Court:

The court affirmed the trial court's decision to dismiss the discharge petition, determining that there was sufficient prima facie evidence to proceed with charges against the accused for conspiracy and corruption. (Paras 11 , 12 )

Issues: The main issues included whether there was sufficient prima facie evidence to justify charges against the accused and the legality of the trial court's refusal to discharge them. (Paras 5 , 9 )

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the trial judge must only determine whether there is a prima facie case based on the prosecution's materials, without delving into the depth of evidence, and that suspicion of involvement is adequate to frame charges. (Paras 11 , 12 )

Result: Revision Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. organized trafficking and conspiracy in emigration. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 7)
2. arguments against the discharge petition. (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9)
3. criteria for framing charges and considering discharge. (Para 11 , 12)

ORDER :

A. Badharudeen, J.

These are Revision Petitions at the instance of accused Nos.4 and 3 in C.C.No.19/2016 on the files of Special Judge, (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam, arising out of Crime No.RC 06(A)/14/CBI/SCB/TVM of 2016. The revision petitioners assail dismissal of discharge petition filed by the petitioners before the Special Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the order impugned and the relevant records to consider the plea raised by both sides.

3. In these matters, the prosecution case is that accused Nos.1 to 4 hatched conspiracy and done the overt acts as under:

“3. The counter officers on duty at the departure side of airport should check passport of passengers by using swiping machine, comparing the photo in the passport with the person by using the Passport Registration and Identification System (PRIDE) or Passport Information Service on Net (PISON) or Ultra Violet Lamp for its genuineness, date of issue, date of expiry, photo substitution, page alteration etc. They should also check Visa for its genuineness, check for lookout circular (LOC) and check for emigration clearance issued by the Protector of Emigrants (PoE), if the emigrant is with ECR passport and is travelling on employment visa.

4. There were organized trafficking of people from India to Gulf. This was possible through a complicated nexus among travel agents, employees of travel agents, emigration officials and also a few officials who were repatriated to Kerala Police from emigration duties.

5. On getting such information, the Government of Kerala issued notification No.81/2014/Home dated 28.04.2014 and the Government of India issued notification No.228/38/2013/AVD-II dated 27-06-2014, u/s.5 of the Delhi Special Establishment Act . On the basis of such notification, the Central Bureau of Investigation, Thiruvananthapuram registered this case as RC 6/A/2014/CBI/SCB/TVM. Investigation was conducted against 45 persons allegedly involved in the racket.

6. The investigation revealed that there existed organized collection of money by travel agents from passengers, especially those from weaker sections of society, in the pretext of facilitating their emigration clearance. A share of this money was being paid to public servants for facilitating smooth emigration clearance. The extra amount collected by the travel agents helped the unauthorized passengers to travel illegally and also the genuine passengers to travel without the hassles of emigration check. The Immigration Officers at the counter (Counter Officers) had wide discretionary power to raise objection to travel of even a genuine passenger. On the other hand, the counter officers could illegally clear passengers with forged passports and 'Emigration Clearance Required' category passengers on job visa without the clearance of Protector of Emigrants (PoE). The scope of detection of irregularities in travel documents is only at the emigration check point. The counter officers are duty bound to check the illegal travel.

7. The 1st accused is an Armed Police Sub Inspector of Kerala Police and was working at the immigration wing of CIAL from 26.05.2008 to 24.04.2009. Before that he had worked at the Trivandrum International Airport during 2004-2007. The 3rd accused is an Armed Police Sub Inspector & 4th accused is a Woman Sub Inspector of Kerala Police and were functioning as Counter Officers at CIAL on different periods. The accused No.2 is a freelance travel agent engaged in the business of servicing of travel documents of emigrant workers proceeding to middle east countries. The accused entered into criminal conspiracy during January 2011 to illegally clear passengers travelling abroad without valid travel document

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top