IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4935 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 2045/08 OF ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION CRMP.10085/2008 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------- JOSE PAUL T.M., S/O.T.V.MARCILENCE AGED 36 YEARS, KAITHAVALAPPIL HOUSE (THAMARASSERY) MANJUMMEL P.O., ELOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) SRI.JEFRIN MANUEL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE S.I OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM CENTRAL STATION REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4935 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner has come to this Court aggrieved by a condition imposed by the learned Magistrate when he was granted bail that the petitioner must deposit half of the admitted amount of Rs.3,95,373/- within a period of 30 days from the date of the order. According to the petitioner he had never admitted that he is liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,95,373/- nor did he agree to pay half of such amount as condition for grant of bail. 2. The learned Prosecutor, on the contrary, submits that his specific instruction received orally is that there was an understanding that half the said amount shall be deposited by the petitioner before the court below. 3. Adv. Mohammed Shah, appearing on behalf of the defacto complainant, submits that it was only after discussions at the Bar that the offer to deposit half the amount was accepted. Crl.M.C.No. 4935 of 2008 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner, on the contrary, submits that there was no such understanding at all. 4. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the controversy must be resolved by the learned Magistrate, before whom the representations were allegedly made. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the matter can be sent back to the court below to consider the matter afresh. It is, at any rate, directed that no action shall be taken against the petitioner for non-payment of the amount directed in the bail order, till 2.2.2009. The parties shall appear before the learned C.J.M., Ernakulam. The learned Magistrate shall hear both sides and resolve the controversy by passing a fresh order on the bail application before 2.2.2009. 5. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed with the above directions. 6. Hand over the order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Communicate the order to the learned Magistrate forthwith. (R. BASANT) Judge Crl.M.C.No. 4935 of 2008 3 tm