IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 16 of 2011()


1. CHANDRAMATHI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH

 Dated :21/01/2011

 O R D E R
                    THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

                   ----------------------------------------

                      Crl.M.C.No.16 of 2011

                   ---------------------------------------

               Dated this 21ST day of January, 2011

                                 ORDER

Petitioner is aggrieved by the condition imposed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thamarassery while releasing vehicle involved vide order on C.M.P.No.4165 of 2010 in Crime No.510 of 2010 of Mukkom Police Station. Vehicle belonging to the petitioner was seized allegedly for draining sewage into the river and thereby committing offence punishable under Secs.24 of the Water (Prevention and Control) of Pollution Act, 1974. Learned Magistrate while ordering release of the vehicle, among other conditions directed that petitioner, not to repeat such offence using the said vehicle shall deposit `.50,000/- in cash as security. Petitioner is aggrieved by that condition. It is submitted by learned counsel that the said condition is harsh and petitioner is not able to deposit the said amount. Learned counsel states that other appropriate conditions are already imposed by the learned Magistrate.

2. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also.

3. It is seen from the order under challenge that learned Magistrate while ordering release of the vehicle has imposed  Crl.M.C.No.16 of 2011 -: 2 :- appropriate conditions. There is also a direction that vehicle shall not be used for (commission of) any offence during the period of (its) interim custody. In view of this condition I am inclined to think that it was not necessary to direct deposit of cash as security. Hence the condition imposed by the learned Magistrate vide the impugned order to deposit cash security is liable to be set aside. But it is directed that violation of any of the other condition would result in forfeiture of the bond and, petitioner would be liable to produce vehicle before the court concerned.

Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed and condition imposed by the learned Magistrate vide order dated December 22, 2010 on C.M.P.No.4165 of 2010 in Crime No.510 of 2010 of Mukkom Police Station directing deposit of `.50,000/- in cash as security is deleted making it clear that violation of any of the other condition would result in forfeiture of the bond.

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-