Loading...

Geetha Rani vs State Of Kerala on 1 December, 2007

Kerala High Court
Geetha Rani vs State Of Kerala on 1 December, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3540 of 2007()


1. GEETHA RANI, W/O. RAJAGOPALAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.MOHANLAL

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :01/12/2007

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                     Crl.M.C.No.3540 of 2007
                    ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 1st day of December 2007

                               O R D E R

The petitioner has been released on bail by the learned

Magistrate subject to conditions as per order dated 4/10/2007.

The petitioner faces allegations for offences punishable inter alia

under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C.

2. After discussions at the Bar, the learned counsel for

the petitioner assails condition Nos.1 and 3. Condition No.1

obliges the petitioner to produce two solvent sureties who shall

be her close relatives. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner does not have any relatives solvent to

that extent – Rs.1,00,000/- who are willing to stand surety. If

such condition were rigidly insisted, the petitioner will have to

remain in custody until the trial is over, submits the learned

counsel for the petitioner.

3. Condition No.3 obliges the accused or her sureties to

deposit Rs.50,000/- as cash security which is to be returned only

after the proceedings are over. The petitioner submits that the

financial position of the petitioner is such that she cannot afford

Crl.M.C.No.3540/07 2

to make such deposit of Rs.50,000/-. If such insistence were

made, that will again entail the consequence of the petitioner

continuing in custody until the case against her is disposed of.

The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the said

condition may also be deleted.

4. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the prayer made

and I am satisfied that condition Nos.1 and 3 do deserve to be

modified/deleted.

5. This petition is in these circumstances allowed.

Condition No.1 shall stand modified. It shall be sufficient if the

sureties produced are solvent and the learned Magistrate is

satisfied about their identity and solvency. The sureties need not

be relatives of the petitioners. The third condition that the

petitioner or her surety must deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- as

cash security is deleted. The learned Magistrate, need only

ensure that the sureties are sufficient and solvent.

6. This petition is accordingly allowed to the above

extent.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3540/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.3540/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information