The Kerala High Court, in a criminal case, granted permission to an accused individual to travel overseas for educational purposes. The court emphasized that the inability of the police to submit a final report should not be the sole reason to deny the accused the right to pursue their studies abroad.

In the relevant case, the petitioner, who is facing charges under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), is pursuing an MSC program in Logistic and Supply Chain Management offered by the University of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia.

Justice Ziyad Rahman, A.A, made the following observation: "It is evident that since the petitioner's surrender, he has been cooperating with the investigation, and his interrogation is already complete. Additionally, it appears that no recovery is needed. Therefore, I believe that the mere absence of a final police report should not prevent him from exercising his right to study abroad. I am of the opinion that the petitioner's request can be granted, provided appropriate conditions are imposed to ensure that he will appear before the jurisdictional court or the investigating officer when required."

The current petition was filed to challenge an order issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate in Adoor. The petitioner, in this case, is the primary accused in a crime registered by the police for an offense under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Based on the provided facts, the petitioner had previously applied for anticipatory bail, and the court granted it on August 4, 2023, subject to specific conditions. One of these conditions required the petitioner to surrender to the investigating officer within three weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. Another condition No. (iv) mandated the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer every Saturday until the final report was filed. Furthermore, condition No. (viii) prohibited the petitioner from leaving India without the permission of the jurisdictional court.

The petitioner had initially applied for anticipatory bail when he returned to India for spinal cord surgery. Now, he needs to go back to Australia to continue his course of study. However, the Magistrate declined the request for bail.

The Court observed that one of the reasons the Magistrate had denied the petitioner's application was because allowing it would have been seen as a violation of condition No. (iv), which required the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer every Saturday. However, it was pointed out that the High Court had already modified condition No. (iv) in an order dated September 27, 2023, which no longer necessitated the petitioner's weekly appearance before the investigating officer.

With the deletion of the fourth condition, it no longer posed a restriction. However, condition No. (viii), which required the petitioner to obtain the permission of the jurisdictional court before leaving India, remained in place. Although the petitioner had submitted an application for such permission, the Magistrate had rejected it on the grounds that the investigation was still ongoing. As a result, the Court noted these circumstances and allowed the criminal miscellaneous case, subject to certain conditions.

Case: Ashiq Sulthan v. State Of Kerala, CRL.MC NO. 7666 OF 2023.

Read/Download Order: Ashiq Sulthan Vs. State of Kerala