IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 135 of 2008() ------------------------ SC.997/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------------ S.GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. K.S.SUNDARA PARIPURNAM, RESIDING AT TC 40/366, SECOND PUTHEN STREET, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-9. BY ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN SRI.V.SANTHARAM SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.ANTO THOMAS SRI.LAKSHMEESH.S.KAMATH RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-01-2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.135 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who is the de facto complainant of Crime No.370/2002 of Fort Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram for an offence punishable, inter alia, under Section 302 IPC challenges Annexure IV order dated 26.12.07 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track(Ad hoc) No.1, Thiruvananthapuram and Annexure IX show cause notice issued to the petitioner in pursuance of Annexure IV order. 2. The prosecution case is that, one Sadasivan Pillai, a watchman, who had been employed by the petitioner herein was brutally murdered in the morning of 9.08.02. All valuable properties including cameras, camera films, computer etc. were stolen from the premises of Sreekrishna Distributors of which the petitioner is the Director. 3. During the course of investigation, the Police seized a Bajaj Auto, an M80 Scooter, Computer CPU-Hard disk- 2 Nos, CPU cover - 1 No., Camera Film Serial No.GA 100 A&A- 1640 Nos., Camera Film Serial No.GB 200 A&A - 720 Nos., Camera Crl.M.C.No.135 of 2008 2 Film Serial No.GC 400 A&A- 1760 Nos., Profoto-1 No., Camera No.KB10 - 44 Nos., Camera No.KB 12 - 5 Nos., Camera Kroma - 3 Nos. 4. The aforementioned 11 items were produced by the Police before the court. These properties were released on 'Moonam Stanam'(kychit) to the petitioner on executing a bond by the petitioner, with two solvent sureties all of whom undertook to forfeit to the Government a sum of Rs.3 lakhs in the event of failure on the part of the petitioner to produce the articles, as and when called for by the Court. 5. Thereafter, when the case was posted for trial, the trial court called upon the petitioner to produce the 11 items of properties. Out of those 11 items, he produced Bajaj Auto, M80-Scooter- 2 Nos., two computer CPU hard disks and one computer CPU cover. The rest of the properties were not produced by him and on enquiry conducted by the court below, it was revealed that they were sold by the petitioner without obtaining the permission of the court. Thereupon the trial court found Crl.M.C.No.135 of 2008 3 that the petitioner had violated the conditions of the bond. As per Annexure IV order, the trial court directed to issue notices to the petitioner and his two sureties, directing them to show cause why further steps should not be taken against them including realisation of bond amount of Rs.3 lakhs, in case of failure to produce the articles received on Moonam Sthanam. Annexure IX -show cause notice was also served on the petitioner herein. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the properties which were sold by him are all perishable items and the only sin committed by him was the sale of those items of properties without obtaining the permission of the Court and that he being the owner of those items and not the offender in respect of those items, the court below should have taken a lenient view and at any rate should have invoked the indemnity clause only proportionate to the value to the properties sold. 7. The court below has only issued direction to issue show cause notice to the petitioner. The petitioner has been served with the show cause notice. Since the bond Crl.M.C.No.135 of 2008 4 which the petitioner executed in favour of the court undertaking to forfeit to the Government Rs.3 lakhs, is not before me, it is not possible to ascertain the exact condition of the bond or the wording of the undertaking. Hence, the petitioner is free to make his submissions before the court below in terms of the bond as well. 8. Reserving this opportunity to the petitioner, this Crl.M.C is disposed of . The petitioner is given 10 days time from today to submit his representation to the show cause notice. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj