IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3636 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.2091/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TALIPARAMBA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 ---------------------- PRESTON SILVA, S/O. KARLOS SILVA, AGED 46 YEARS, KINATTADIVILAKOM, VALIYATHURA, VELLAKADAVU.P.O, MUTTATHARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA. 3. SHO, ALAKODE POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C No.3636 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 ORDER Petitioner while travelling in an Ambassador car was intercepted and arrested by the police officials. There were other accused persons also. Ivory was allegedly being transported without any valid documents in that vehicle. Seizure was effected. The case was transferred to the forest authorities. Along with other articles, an amount of Rs.42,000/- was also seized from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner applied for release of the said amount. The learned Magistrate directed release of the amount to the petitioner on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum. It was further stipulated that the sureties must either be Government employees or persons capable to produce their original title deeds. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is not able to produce any Government employees. He has produced persons with properties. They had produced their original title deeds also before this Court. But the court insisted that the title deed must be deposited in court. In fact, there is no Crl.M.C No.3636 of 2008 2 such specific direction in the order. But insistence was made that the title deeds must be deposited. In these circumstances the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the conditions imposed are unnecessarily onerous and unjustified. Appropriate directions may be issued. The said stipulations may be vacated, it is prayed. The counsel further submits that the currency does belong to the petitioner. The same is not in any way connected with the alleged crime. There is no contra case specifically advanced anywhere till now. 2. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am satisfied that it is sufficient if the petitioner is directed to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. If the learned Magistrate is otherwise satisfied about the sufficiency and acceptability of the sureties, it is not necessary to insist that they must deposit their original title deeds in court. 3. This Crl.M.C is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- /true copy/ P.A to Judge