A.M.Noushad Baqavi vs State Of Kerala

V.G.Arun, J

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.7 of 2023 of Cheruthuruthy Police Station, alleging commission of offence under Section 451, 354A(1)(i) of Indian Penal Code, Section 8 r/w Section 7 and 10 r/w Section 9(p) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail by this Court as per Annexure A1 order, subject to certain conditions. As per condition No.6, the petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial court. The petitioner being a religious scholar has been invited to attend and speak at a religious function in Manama, being held from 17.03.2023 onwards. He is also invited for a function at Sharjah being held on 25.03.2023. Circumstances being such, the petitioner moved a petition before the trial court seeking permission to go abroad. That petition having been rejected as per Annexure A6, this Crl.M.C is filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of being convinced that the petitioner can be permitted to leave the country by relaxing condition No.6, this court having had granted such liberty to the trial court, the request for leaving the country was rejected by referring to condition No.3 which requires the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on every Saturday, between 10:00 AM and 11:00AM, until further orders. It is submitted that the understanding of the Special court in this regard is flawed since the wording of condition No.6 indicates that the trial court can grant permission to the petitioner to leave the State and in such event, the 3rd condition will not be an impediment.

3.Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

4.Going by the tone and tenor of Annexure A6, I find merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial court is conferred with the liberty to permit the petitioner to leave the country, if convinced of the reasons stated. As a matter of a fact, the impugned order shows that the trial court was convinced that the petitioner could be permitted to attend the religious functions abroad. The only impediment the trial court found was condition No.3 requiring the petitioner to report before the investigating officer on every Saturday.

5.In my opinion, the 3rd condition cannot stand in the way of the petitioner being permitted to leave the country for a short period. The requirement under condition No. 3 can be satisfied by imposing alternate conditions. The Crl.M.C is hence disposed of as under;

(i).The petitioner shall be permitted to go abroad for attending the two functions evidenced by Annexures A2 and A3.

(ii).The petitioner shall file an affidavit and presented through his lawyer, undertaking to return to Kerala on or before 30.03.2023 and shall deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- before the trial court, as a condition for grant of permission to go abroad.

(iii)The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer the very next day of his return and continue to comply with condition No.3 in Annexure A1 order from then onwards.