IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 6TH MAY 2010 / 16TH VAISAKHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1614 of 2010() ------------------------- CRL.M.C.No.388 OF 2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE, MANJERI ARISING FROM CRIME NO.220 OF 2010 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 2 & 4 TO 8 -------------------------------------- 1. SHOUKATHA ALI @ SHOUKATH, AGED 21 YEARS S/O. ABOOBACKER, MOSSANTEPURAKKAL HOUSE, KOTHAPPARAMB, KOOTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. FAISAL, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. BEERAVU, CHOKKIDINTEPURAKKAL HOUSE, PARIZ, KOOTTAYI,TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. MUSTAFFA @ MARAKKAR, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIMARAKKAR, MOOSSANTEPURAKKAL HOUSE, PARIZ, KOOTTAYI,TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. HABEEB, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. CHERIYAKUTTY @ CHEIRYABAPPUTTY, KAKKACHINTEPURAKKAL HOUSE, KOOTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. JAFER, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. SAIDU MOHAMMED, VADIKKADAVATH HOUSE, KOTHAPPARAMB, KOOTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. ASSAINARA, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. HAMZAKOYA, OLUANTEPURAKKAL HOUSE, KOTHAPPARAMB, KOOTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SMT REKHA C NAIR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1614 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 06th day of May, 2010 ORDER Learned Public Prosecutor appears for respondent. 2. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 4 to 8 in Crime No.220 of 2010 of Tirur Police Station for offences punishable under sections 120B, 143, 146, 148, 427, 452 323, 324, 326 and 307 r/w 149 of the Penal Code. As per Annexure-A1, order in Crl.M.C.No.388 of 2010 learned Sessions Judge, Manjeri granted bail to the petitioners subject to conditions that petitioners executed bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum each. The condition that is impugned in this proceeding is to deposit of Rs.5,000/- each by the petitioners and sureties. Learned counsel, placing reliance on the decision in Jomon Vs. State of Kerala (2010 (2) KLT 371) contends that it was not necessary to impose a condition for deposit of amount when the presence of the petitioners otherwise has been secured by appropriate conditions. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that petitioner No.1/accused No.2 is involved in several other cases as well. 3. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has not stated any compelling reason for directing deposit of cash security along with Crl.M.C.No.1614 of 2010 : 2 : execution of bond as stated in Annexure-A1, order. It has come on record that petitioner No.1 is accused in several other criminal cases. Having regard to the facts and circumstances I am inclined to think that deposit of cash security is not necessary. Hence that condition is lifted. I however direct that one of the sureties shall be a close relative of petitioner No.1/accused No.2. The petition is allowed to the above extent. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-