Bineesh Benny vs State Of Kerala

C. Jayachandran, J

Petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime no.823/2024 of Vellikulangara Police Station, Thrissur. He is aggrieved by Annexure-6 Order, which refused permission to the petitioner to travel abroad, and grant exemption from personal appearance for that purpose.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent/State and Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for additionally impleaded 2nd respondent. Perused the records.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a YouTube Vloger, who posts travel videos by name 'Byn's Wanderings'. The petitioner would contend that he took tickets to travel to Georgia on 27.11.2024. However, the instant crime was booked on 23.11.2024, for which reason he could not travel. Now, the investigation is practically complete and his physical presence is not required. He intends to travel to Georgia. It was also submitted that, his Visa will expire on 03.04.2025. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner will undertake to come back well before his Visa expires. His livelihood may not be curtailed, is the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

This application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It was pointed out that the Visa will expire on 03.04.2025 and that hardly one month is remaining for the same, wherefore the bonafides of the need projected is under a cloud of suspicion. It was also pointed out that though the petitioner was interrogated in custody, the details of the mobile phone used by him have not been traced yet. The investigation is not complete. The petitioner is involved in two other crimes, of which the petitioner stands acquitted in one; and charge sheeted in the other. In the surviving crime, the offences alleged are under 354-D and 506(1) of the Penal Code and also under Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner can be permitted to travel, on stringent conditions. This Court notice that the Investigating Officer has no case that the presence of the petitioner is warranted for the progress of the investigation. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has been in custody for 47 days, which would have served the purpose of interrogation adequately. The petitioner is also prepared to provide adequate security, so as to ensure his return. The return of the petitioner and his availability for the purpose of trial is the crucial matter which requires to be addressed, in the context of the instant petition. In this regard, as already noticed, the presence of the petitioner is not warranted for the completion of the investigation. Once the investigation is complete and final report filed, the petitioner will have to appear before the trial court. As already indicated, the Visa expires on 03.04.2025, and there is hardly one month and a few days for the same. If the petitioner is permitted to travel for the said period, no prejudice will be caused to the investigation, as also, the prosecution. In order to secure the presence of the petitioner back, this Court is of the opinion that, the petitioner shall deposit his title deed before the trial court, besides furnishing a security of Rupees five lakhs, by way of demand draft, for which course the petitioner is amenable. Besides, one of the petitioner's parents and a close relative of the petitioner shall be the surety.

In the circumstances, Annexure-6 Order will stand set aside and Crl.M.P. no.534/2025 filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy, will stand allowed subject to the following conditions:

(i). The petitioner shall execute necessary bond as directed by the learned Magistrate agreeing to return before the expiry of his Visa.

(ii). The petitioner shall produce his return ticket from Georgia before the trial court.

(iii). The petitioner will make a security deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only), by way of Demand Draft, before the trial court at the time of executing the bond.

(iv). One among the parents of the petitioner and a close relative of the petitioner will stand as sureties, so as to ensure the return of the petitioner back to India.

(v). The second respondent will appropriately issue a communication to the authority competent to issue/renew Visa at Georgia requesting to ensure that the petitioner’s Visa is not renewed, once it expires on 03.04.2025, inasmuch as, the petitioner’s presence is required to answer criminal charges in India and also in view of the fact that, he is permitted to travel abroad by this Court only during the period of validity of the current Visa.

(vi). The Police Clearance Certificate shall not be issued to the petitioner, if any, asked for.

(vii). The petitioner shall also comply with such other procedural requirements, if any, under the Code and the Criminal Rules of Practice.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed as indicated above.