IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2011 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 4002 of 2011() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.451/2011 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER ------------------------------------- SUSEELA. B, W/O.RAMACHANDRAN, JAYESH BHAVAN, THENGAMOM. P.O., PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE. BY SRI.N.DHARMADAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SMT.D.P.RENU. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADOOR POLICE STATION, ADOOR-691 523. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.RAJESH VIJAYAN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs Crl.MC.No. 4002 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE I- TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN CRL.RP.2070/2011 DATED 19.9.2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE II- TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DT.30.9.2011 FILED BY PETITIONER. ANNEXURE III- TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT AND POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 17.8.2011. ANNEXURE IV- CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.MP.6176/2011 IN CR.NO.451/2011 DT.27.10.2011 OF THE JUDICIAL IST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ADOOR. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4002 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December 2011 O R D E R Petitioner claims to be the RC owner of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-26-A 9779 which was stated to have been seized by the police in connection with Crime No.451/2011 of Adoor Police Station. The petitioner is not an accused in that case. It is submitted that the allegation was that the son of the petitioner was arrayed as an accused alleging that spirit was transported by him in a particular vehicle. This vehicle was seized by the police from Chengannur and not from or near the godown where from spirit was alleged to have been seized by the police. 2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this vehicle was seized on the premise that a number plate was found in the godown. Whatever that be, there is no allegation that the engine Crl.M.C. No.4002 of 2011 -: 2 :- number and chassis number was tampered with. Therefore, the identity of the vehicle cannot be disputed. 3. The request made by the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle was in fact allowed by the learned Magistrate but imposing onerous conditions which the petitioner is unable to comply with because of his financial incapacity, it is submitted. The first condition mentioned in Annexure IV order is that the petitioner should deposit Rs.4,75,000/- which is stated to be the value of the vehicle. Besides, the petitioner has also to execute a bond. There are other conditions also. The only objection is with regard to condition No.1 which directs the petitioner to deposit Rs.4,75,000/-. If such a condition is imposed virtually it would amount to denying the petitioner's right to get release of the vehicle. Hence that condition may be deleted, the learned senior counsel submits. 4. Considering all the aspects, I find that condition No.1 imposed by the court below will stand deleted. But the Crl.M.C. No.4002 of 2011 -: 3 :- petitioner will direct the sureties to produce the attested copies of the title deeds of their property along with latest basic tax receipts for executing a bond for Rs.4,75,000/-. The learned Magistrate will release the vehicle immediately on executing the bond as mentioned above. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt