IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3085 of 2008() ------------------------- CRMP.2804/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- 1. VALSAN, S/O.EKORON, PALLIPARAMBIL, KUZHIPPILLY. 2. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.GOPALAN, NIKATHILTHARA, MANANCHERRY KUNNU. 3. SATHEESAN, S/O.MUKUNDAN, KUTTIPPILLISSERI, THANIPPADAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.439 OF 2008 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION). BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2008 ALONG WITH CRMC NO.3086/08 AND OTHER CONNECTED CASES,, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. Nos. 3085, 3086, 3089 & 3096 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008 ORDER As identical question arises for determination in these four Crl.M.Cs. and the challenge is against the identical orders passed by the same Magistrate against the petitioners who face identical allegations, I am choosing to dispose of these petitions by this common order. 2. The petitioners face allegations in different crimes – all registered under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The offences alleged are bailable, it is submitted. By the identical orders, the accused persons/the petitioners were granted bail subject to conditions. The petitioners are aggrieved by one condition imposed by the impugned orders which obliges the sureties to produce their original title deeds before the learned Crl.M.C. Nos. 3085, 3086, 3089 & 3096 of 2008 -: 2 :- Magistrate . 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is absolutely no justification in imposing such a condition. The petitioners shall produce sureties. But it may be difficult for them to leave the title deeds in court. They shall produce necessary material to induce the requisite satisfaction in the mind of the learned Magistrate about their solvency and adequacy. Ritualistic insistence on production of title deeds and leaving those title deeds in court may not be made. There is no reason why such an onerous condition should be imposed on the petitioners who have no criminal antecedents, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Notice given to the learned Public Prosecutor. These petitions are not opposed. I am satisfied, in the absence of any tangible reason to justify imposition of such a condition, that the said condition can be deleted. 5. In the result: (a) These Crl.M.Cs. are allowed. (b) The condition that the sureties must produce the title deeds before court as condition for their acceptance as sureties is hereby deleted. (c) The sureties may produce any documents before the Crl.M.C. Nos. 3085, 3086, 3089 & 3096 of 2008 -: 3 :- learned Magistrate. On consideration of such documents, if satisfied that the sureties are solvent and adequate, they can be accepted and the learned Magistrate should not insist on the deposit of title deeds. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/