High Court Kerala High Court

Ashok Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
Ashok Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2218 of 2007()


1. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O SADANANDAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SIJU KAMALASANAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/07/2007

 O R D E R






                              R. BASANT, J.

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

                     Crl.M.C. NO.2218   OF  2007

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

              Dated this the  11th    day of July, 2007



                                  ORDER

Aggrieved by an order passed by the learned Magistrate

under Sec.451 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner had come to this

Court. By order dated 6/6/07, this Court had directed that the

vehicle in question be released to the petitioner subject to

conditions. Condition No.2 obliges the petitioner to make a

cash deposit of Rs.25,000/- and also to offer bank guarantee for

the balance amount. This was directed to be done within a

period of one month from 6/6/07.

2. The petitioner contended before the learned

Magistrate that he is entitled to get release of the vehicle and

that he need deposit the amount and produce the bank

guarantee only within one month from the date of the order.

The learned Magistrate, according to me, has rightly turned

down the said prayer and rejected the said application by

Crl.M.C. NO. 2218 OF 2007 -: 2 :-

Annexure-3 order. The petitioner has come before this Court

again.

3. What is the present grievance? A period of one month

having already elapsed from 6/6/07 and the petitioner having not

complied with the direction, there can be no surviving dispute as

to whether the condition has been complied with or not.

Admittedly, it has not been complied with. The learned counsel

for the petitioner, in these circumstances, only prays that the

petitioner may be granted time of one month more from this date

to make cash deposit and make the bank guarantee available

before the court. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I

am satisfied that a lenient view can be taken and such extension

of time can be granted to the petitioner.

4. In the result, this petition is allowed. The petitioner

shall have time of one month more from this date to comply with

the direction issued on 6/6/07.

Sd/-




                                                       (R. BASANT, JUDGE)




Nan/


             //true copy//                P.S. To Judge




 Crl.M.C. NO. 2218 OF  2007 -: 3 :-