IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2326 of 2008() ------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.472/2008 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC) III, MANJERI .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. MUTHUMMA,W/O MARUKAN, AGED 25 YEARS, PAZHANI, ADIVARAM,TAMILNADU. 2. MARIYA, D/O NAGARAJ, AGED 19 YEARS, PAZHANI, ADIVARAM, TAMILNADU, (PAHANI POLICE STATION LIMITED.). BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- S.I. OF POLICE, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2326 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioners were enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Judge subject to conditions. The petitioners are accused 4 and 5 and they face allegations in a crime registered under Section 402 I.P.C. One of the conditions-Condition No.(b) imposed by the learned Sessions Judge is extracted below: “b) Before granting bail to the petitioners, the petitioners have to produce certificates showing their identity, issued by competent authorities. The Judicial First Class Magistrate can ascertain the veracity/genuineness of those certificates by contacting the competent authorities by issuing letter. Till that stage the accused need not be enlarged on bail.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners with great effort obtained certificates issued by the Village Administrative Officer, Palani and produced the same before the learned Magistrate on 14.05.08. On that day, the learned Magistrate passed the following order: Crl.M.C. No.2326 of 2008 2 “Issue letter to concerned authorities for getting a report with respect to the veracity of the certificates produced.”. The case was posted awaiting report to 30.05.08. On 30.05.08 there was no sitting and the matter was posted to 31.05.08. On 31.05.08, the matter was adjourned to 06.06.08 and on that day, the matter has been further adjourned to 31.07.08. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners remain in custody even now though they were arrested as early as on 12.04.08 and they have been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge as per common order dated 26.04.08. The learned Magistrate has not received any reply so far from the Village Administrative Officer, Palani Tamil Nadu. The petitioners are hence being detained in custody unnecessarily, it is submitted. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the said condition may now be deleted. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Investigation is now complete and the final report has already been filed. So far no one has raised a grievance that the petitioners have not revealed their identity correctly. Even in the final report such grievance is not raised by the Investigating Officer, it is submitted. The learned counsel for the petitioners Crl.M.C. No.2326 of 2008 3 further submits that the petitioners have offered adequate, sufficient and solvent sureties. In spite of these, the petitioners are compelled to remain in custody, it is lamented. 5. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that though it is not necessary to delete the said condition, appropriate further direction can be issued. 6. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, allowed. The following further directions are issued: i) The petitioners shall be released from custody forthwith., if the learned Magistrate is satisfied about the sufficiency, adequacy and solvency of the sureties produced by the accused persons. ii) They may be released subject to the direction that they must appear before the learned Magistrate on all Mondays at 11 a.m until the report from the Village Administrative Officer, Palani is received; iii) The learned Magistrate shall direct the Investigating Officer also to make necessary verification and obtain necessary report from the Village Administrative Officer, Palani, who had issued the resident certificate of the petitioners as insisted by the learned Sessions Judge. Crl.M.C. No.2326 of 2008 4 7. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied, that the mere fact that there is administrative delay in the Village Administrative Officer confirming the issue of the residence certificate should not entail the unnecessary detention of the petitioners even for one day for that and hence this direction is issued. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioners. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-