IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2138 of 2008() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP.3080/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, ATTINGAL .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ SASILATHA, D/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI KUNNATHAZHIKATHU VEEDU, ALATHUKAVU, PONGANADU, KILIMANOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM BY P.P. SRI.C.M.NAZER THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ====================================== CRL.R.P. NO.2138 OF 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 30th day of June 2008 ORDER Petitioner challenges condition No.2 imposed by the JFCM I, Attingal in the order passed in CMP 3086/2008, whereby the mini lorry of which the petitioner claims to be the owner was directed to be given on interim custody to the petitioner. The impugned condition is that he shall make a cash deposit of Rs.25,000/-. According to the petitioner, there was no sand in the mini lorry at the time of its seizure and so the Magistrate should not have imposed the above conditions. 2. According to the prosecution, the lorry was seized after it had unloaded the sand which was illegally transported in the lorry. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that since at the time of seizure of the lorry, there was no sand in the lorry, the imposition of the said condition is onerous and not according to law. 4. I cannot agree. The imposition of the said condition is for interim release of the lorry and it is perfectly in accordance with the decision of this Court in Ahmmed Kutty v State of Kerala (2008(1) KLT 1068). This revision is dismissed. Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 V.RAMKUMAR,JUDGE css/