IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1828 of 2008() ------------------------------ CMP.6066/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- ABDULLAKUTTY, S/O.PAREEKUTTY @ MUSLIYAR BAVA, KADAMBIL POOZHITHARAMMAL HOUSE, TRIPPANGODE AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY NASER K.P., S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, KUNNATH PARAMBIL HOUSE, KALOOR PO PUTHUPALLY, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/STATE: ------------------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. No,. 1828 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 13-06-2008 ORDER Petitioner challenges the order dated 5-1-2008 passed by the J.F.C.M., Tirur in C.M.P. No. 6066 of 2007 as per which the learned Magistrate granted interim release on certain conditions of the sand lorry of which the petitioner is the registered owner. According to the petitioner the condition imposed by the Magistrate directing the petitioner to make a cash deposit of Rs. 25,000/- is an onerous condition because the vehicle is a 1994 model vehicle, in the light of the decision in Ahammedkutty v. State of Kerala (2008 (1) KLT 1068), the above contention is not available to the petitioner. The learned Magistrate has passed an order in compliance of the directions in the said decision. I see no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. This Crl.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani.