Kerala HC Permits Section 498A Accused To Go Abroad For Studies

Jahanvi Agarwal

The Kerala High Court, in response to a criminal miscellaneous application filed by an accused, has granted permission for them to travel abroad and pursue their higher studies. The court’s decision was based on the belief that the ’inability of the police to submit the final report should not serve as the sole justification for denying the right of the accused to pursue education overseas.

In this case, the petitioner, who faces charges under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, is currently enrolled in a program for an MSc in Logistics and Supply Chain Management at the University of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia.

The bench consisted of Justice Ziyad Rahman, A. A who observed that:

“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.”

This particular petition was lodged to contest an order issued by the Judicial First-Class Magistrate in Adoor, where the petitioner stands as the primary accused.

The petitioner initially sought for an anticipatory bail from the court, which was granted on August 4, 2023, with certain stipulations. One of these conditions required the petitioner to turn himself in to the investigating officer within three weeks of receiving a copy of the court’s order. Another condition mandated that he must meet with the investigating officer every Saturday until the final report was filed.

Furthermore, he was prohibited from leaving India without the jurisdictional court’s permission. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail upon returning to India for spinal cord surgery, and now he needed to go back to Australia to continue his studies.