IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2008 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 316 of 2008(S) NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER DATED 13.12.2007 IN CRL.MP.3403/2007 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE I, PERAMBRA PETITIONER:PETITIONER: --------------------------- SAKEER HUSSAIN, S/O.MOIDEEN KOYA, AGED 24 YEARS, RAHATH MANZIL, THRIVANGOOR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT: ------------- MANOJ KUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU,C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- CON. CASE (C). NO. 316 OF 2008 S ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.DATTU, C.J. Petitioner alleges that the Sub Inspector of Police, Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode District has deliberately and wilfully disobeyed the orders and directions issued by the learned Magistrate in Crl.M.P.No.3403 of 2007. 2. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 13.12.2007 has directed the Sub Inspector of Police, Perambra Police Station to release the vehicle to the interim custody of the petitioner on the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum and on production of the photograph of the vehicle. 3. When the matter was posted for admission, we have directed the learned Government Pleader, Smt.K.Meera, to take notice for the respondent and to get appropriate instructions. 4. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that the Sub Inspector of Police had informed the complainant that he may come to the police station and take the vehicle on fulfilling the condition imposed by the learned Magistrate while passing the order in Crl.M.P.No.3403 of 2007 dated 13.12.2007. CON. CASE (C). NO. 316 OF 2008 :: 2 :: 5. In view of this development, in our opinion, for the present, we need not have to take cognizance of the Contempt Petition. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is dropped. However, liberty is reserved to the complainant to approach this Court if need arises in future. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/