1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRI.APPLICATION NO.3902 OF 2008 (PRAKASH SHYAMSUNDER KHEMKA VS. STATE OF MAH.) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Shri S. Dewani, Advocate for applicant. Shri S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for Respondent/ State. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 11, 2008. 1. The learned A.P.P. objects to this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the applicant has another more efficacious remedy of filing revision. 2. Ordinarily if such remedy is available the applicant ought to have approached the revisional Court. However, in this Case, the challenge is to the order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur, whereby the learned Magistrate has directed release of car belonging to the applicant imposing following conditions in paragraph 2 of the operative order : 2 “2. During inquiry and trial of the case arise of of Crime No.11/08, seized Honda City Car bearing RTO registration No.MH-31/CP-5360 be return to the applicant, Prakash Khemka on furnishing indemnity bond of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) on stamp paper of Rs.1000/- and bank guarantee of nationalized bank of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lakhs), which shall be not for less than 5 years. He is further directed to deposit cash security of Rs.3,00,000/- (Three Lakhs) in the court which shall be kept till the conclusion of trial.” 2. On their face, the conditions are too harsh for securing availability of car worth Rs. Seven Lacs. The learned Magistrate has sought indemnity bond of Rs. Ten Lacs, Bank Guarantee of Rs. Five Lacs and also sought cash security of Rs. Three Lacs, where indemnity bond in the sum of Rs.Ten Lacs should have been sufficient. 3. In view of this, instead of tossing the matter to another Court and making the Court to spend time again, where I have spent my time for hearing this application, by exercising inherent powers, the order is modified by deleting the conditions of furnishing Bank Guarantee and Cash Security in the said order. 3 4. This application is entertained without creating any precedent i.e. clearly indicating that such applications shall not be entertained if another remedy is available. 5. The application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE RR.