Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1513
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
JOSEPH AUGUSTINE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 11609 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SREENATH VIJAYARAGHAVAN, SMT.AKHILA C., SHRI.GOVIND P.V.
For the Respondents: SMT.BINDU O.V.
The court upheld the necessity of releasing a passport for professional requirements, overriding previous conditions of its detention.
Headnote:The petitioner, accused No.4 in Crime No.133/2025, sought the release of his passport after a prior order stipulated its surrender post bail approval. The court noted compliance with bail conditions and deemed further detention of the passport unnecessary. Key issues revolve around the validity of the prior order and the petitioner's professional needs warranting the release of the passport. Ultimately, the court found merit in the petitioner's argument and overturned the lower court's ruling, mandating the passport release.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for passport release by the accused. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. opposition by the public prosecutor. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's decision to release the passport based on compliance with bail conditions. (Para 4) |
O R D E R
(Dated this the 16th day of January, 2026)
The petitioner who is the accused No.4 in Crime No.133 of 2025 of Nedumbassery Police Station, Ernakulam, preferred this Crl.M.C being aggrieved by Annexure-A8 order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly, rejecting his application for releasing his passport. While granting bail to the petitioner as per Annexure-A1 order, the learned Magistrate has directed him to surrender his passport within 15 days, which he complied. Though he has filed an application to release his passport, the same as rejected as per Annexure-A8 order.
Aggrieved by the said order, he preferred this Crl.M.C.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is a Disco Jocky (DJ) by profession . In connection with his profession, he has to go abroad frequently. Therefore, he prays for setting aside Annexure-A8 order and to release his passport.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.
4. While granting bail as per Annexure-A1 order, the learned Magistrate has imposed strict conditions. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner has already complied with all the conditions promptly.
In the above circumstances, further detention of his passport is uncalled for and as such, I am inclined to set aside Annexure-A8 order. The learned Magistrate is directed to release the passport of the petitioner.
Sd/-
