IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2009 / 11TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4978 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.7221/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TALIPARAMBA CRIME NO.651 OF 2008 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : --------------- JOSHY.PJ., S/O.JOSEPH, 49 YEARS BUSINESS, PUTHENVEETTIL, KARIKKOTTAKKARI PO., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONOURABLEW HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM REP. BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4978 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of January, 2009 ORDER The vehicle belonging to the petitioner was allegedly used for the commission of an offence under the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. The petitioner is one of the accused persons. He applied for release of his vehicle to him. It was directed to be released, but subject to conditions. 2. The petitioner is not the registered owner, but he is only an agreement owner who had purchased the vehicle from the registered owner. It is submitted at the Bar that the registered owner has already reported to the learned Magistrate that he has no objection against release of the vehicle to the petitioner herein. The petitioner is aggrieved by condition No.1 imposed by the learned Magistrate under the impugned order which obliges the petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.3 lakhs with the registered owner as one of the sureties. According to the petitioner, the registered owner, though he has no objection against release of the vehicle to the petitioner, is not willing to offer himself as a surety for the petitioner. This has resulted in Crl.M.C. No.4978 of 2008 2 continuance of the vehicle in the custody of the court exposing the same to damage and deterioration. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the said condition may now be deleted. 3. If the registered owner files an affidavit expressing his willingness to release the vehicle to the petitioner, I find no reason why it should be insisted that such registered owner must himself be willing to offer himself as surety for the petitioner. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the said condition imposed can be modified. 4. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is allowed in part; ii) If the registered owner files an affidavit before the learned Magistrate to satisfy the learned Magistrate that the registered owner has no objection against release of the vehicle to the petitioner, the learned Magistrate need not insist on the registered owner figuring as a surety. The learned Magistrate can accept any two solvent sureties offered by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-