Section 498A IPC| Merely Because Police Didn't Submit Final Report, Accused Can't Be Deprived Of Studying Abroad: Kerala HC

In the pertinent matter, according to the petitioner-who is an accused under Section 498A IPC is studying MSC Logistic and Supplying Chain Management conducted by the University of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Australia.

Justice Ziyad Rahman, A.A thus observed, “…it is evident that, since the date of the surrender, he has been cooperating with the investigation and interrogation of the petitioner is already over. Apparently, no recovery is also to be affected. Therefore, I am of the view that, merely because the police have not submitted the final report, he need not be deprived of his right to go abroad to pursue his studies. Therefore, I am of the view that the prayer sought by the petitioner can be granted by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure that he will appear before the jurisdictional court or before the investigating officer as and when required”.

Advocate Sarin Panicker appeared for the petitioner and Public Prosecutor Jacob E. Simon appeared for the State.

This present petition was filed challenging an order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor. The petitioner herein is the first accused in the said crime, registered by the police for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

As per the facts the petitioner earlier moved the Court seeking anticipatory bail, which was granted by the Court on August 4, 2023 with conditions. As per one of such conditions, the petitioner was directed to surrender before the investigating officer within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. As per the condition No. (iv), he had to appear before the investigating officer every Saturday till the filing of the final report. The condition No.(viii) was that the petitioner should not leave India without the permission of the jurisdictional court.

The petitioner moved the application for anticipatory bail when he came to India in connection with the surgery of spinal code. Now, he had to return to Australia to continue the said course. However, the Magistrate rejected the prayer.

The Court thus noted that one of the grounds on which the Magistrate had dismissed the application was that if the application submitted by the petitioner is allowed it would be a violation of condition No.(iv) imposed by the Court.

However, the High Court, in the order dated September 27, 2023 had already modified the condition No.(iv), which necessitated the appearance of the petitioner before the investigating officer every Saturday.

Therefore, as the fourth condition was deleted, therefore the same could not have operated as a bar. “The remaining condition No.(viii) necessitates the permission of the jurisdictional court for leaving India. Even though an application was submitted in this regard, it was rejected by the learned Magistrate, by observing that the investigation was not over”, the court noted in the order.

Thus, the Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous case subject to certain conditions.

Cause Title: Ashiq Sulthan v. State Of Kerala [Neutral Citation: 2023/KER/61543]