IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3573 of 2008() ------------------------- CRRP.20/2008 of SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CRMP.7087/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, PUNALUR CRIME NO.436/2008 OF PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- NIRMAL, S/O.SATHYASEELAN, VIMAL BHAVANAM, THALAVOOR MURI, PIDAVOOR, PATHANAPURAM, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3573 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioner, in whose favour an order under Section 457 Cr.P.C has been passed directing release of a vehicle involved in an offence under 'The Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act', has come to this court for vacating condition No.5 imposed on him which obliges him to produce documents to show that he is solvent to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is unable to comply with this condition and consequently the vehicle belonging to the petitioner, in spite of the impugned order, is now remaining in custody of the authorities. It is totally unnecessary and harsh to insist on such a condition. The petitioner cannot produce such documents. Production of such documents is unnecessary as sufficient sureties have already been insisted by the learned Magistrate. 2. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The counsel has been heard. I am satisfied that imposition of Crl.M.C.No.3573/08 2 condition No.5 is not strictly necessary. Already directions have been issued that bonds must be executed by two solvent sureties, insistence that the petitioner must show his solvency is, in these circumstances, unnecessary. 3. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C is allowed. b) Condition No.5 imposed on the petitioner by the impugned order is set aside. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3573/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.3573/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008