IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 4TH MAY 2010 / 14TH VAISAKHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1588 of 2010() ------------------------- CMP.598(A)/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOLLAM (JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOLLAM) IN CRIME NO.310/09 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION IN KOLLAM DISTRICT .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 6 ----------------------------- 1. KIZHORE S/O. ANASOOYA, AGED 25, H.NO.116, NEAR IOC BASIN ROAD, PARAMESWARI NAGAR KARIMEDU, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM, (THIRUVATHOOR) 2. KUMAR,S/O.MARY,AGED 27,HOUSE NO.OLD NO.7,NEW NO.13,6TH STREET, RAJAMAMANGALAM, VILLIVAGAM, CHENNAI - 9, TAMILNADU. 3. KOSHORE, AGED 26,VENKITTAYYA, DOOR NO.V, GOVT.ISSUED COLONY, BEGELMANDALAM,KARAPRATTIPA, BITHRAGUND, NELLOOR DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH. 4. LAZER, S/O.MANORAMA, AGED 23,HOUSE NO. OLD -54,NEW NO.24, INDIRA NAGAR, PALLAM, RAJAMANGALAM, VILLIVAKOM, CHENNAI -49, THAMILNADU. 5. JOHNSON, AGED 29,S/O.MALLAYYA, H.NO.5, 2ND STREET, NEAR WATER TANK, RAJAMANGALAM, -DO- -DO- 6. PRADEEP,AGED 26,S/O.BABU, DOOR NO.45, NEAR TELUNGU CHURCH, 3RD CROSS ROAD, JARDHAPRET, KAVELI DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH. BY ADV. SRI.P.SHAIJAN JOSEPH RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT -------------------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI K M FIROZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH,J --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.NO. 1588 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of May, 2010. O R D E R Petitioners are accused in Crime No.310/2009 of Kollam West Police Station for offence punishable under Section 379 r/w 34 of the Penal Code. They were granted bail as per Annexure A-1 order dated 23.01.2010 in CMP No.598(A)/2010 with the condition that they shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each and that the sureties shall produce a solvency certificate. A further direction is that one of the sureties shall be residing in the locality and other surety preferably be a relative of petitioners. Learned counsel submits that petitioners are in Jail and were not able to get solvency certificates. Learned counsel also undertakes that petitioners are willing to produce sureties from State of Kerala and offer property situated in the State of Kerala as a security. 2 Having regard to the circumstances stated by learned counsel, I am not inclined to think it is necessary to cause production of solvency certificate as directed by the learned Magistrate. It is also not necessary that one of the sureties shall be a relative of petitioners. Instead, I direct that as undertaken by learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners, sureties shall be from the State of Kerala and that landed properties situated in State of Kerala be offered as security. The order under challenge is modified as above and the petition is allowed to that extent. THOMAS P JOSEPH,JUDGE. pm