IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4762 of 2008() ------------------------- CRMP.10065/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, PUNALUR .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------- EDISON MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, AGED 30 YEARS VAROOR VEEDU, PERINGALLUR MURI EDAMULACKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE EXICSE INSPECTOR, PATHANAPURAM EXCISE RANGE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4762 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has been granted bail after his arrest in a crime alleging offences punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner is allegedly a habitual offender and the bail granted to him is bail by default. The prosecution has a case that the petitioner is involved in several illicit transactions relating to import of spirit into Kerala. The petitioner is aggrieved by the latter part of condition No.4 which obliges him to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- as cash security in court. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the said condition may be deleted. The learned counsel submits that because of that condition and the inability of the petitioner to comply with that condition, he is constrained to remain in custody though the order granting bail was passed as early as on 06/11/2008. 2. The application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the learned Magistrate has committed no error whatsoever in insisting on such a strict condition. Considering the background of the case and the antecedents of the petitioner, imposition of the said condition is absolutely justified, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. Crl.M.C.No.4762/08 2 3. Having heard both sides, I am not persuaded to interfere with the said condition imposed. However, I take note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that at least the petitioner may be given some time to raise and deposit the said cash security of Rs.50,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that he shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- immediately. But he prays that for deposit of the balance amount, reasonable further time may be granted to the petitioner. I am satisfied that the said request can be accepted. 4. In the result, this petition is allowed in part. Condition No.4 obliging the petitioner to make deposit of a cash security of Rs.50,000/- is modified to the following extent: a) The petitioner shall be released from custody on his satisfying all other conditions and on deposit of an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as cash security. b) The petitioner shall have further time of sixty days from the date of his release to deposit the entire balance amount of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only). Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.4762/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.4762/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008