Haneefa vs State Represented By Public … on 9 October, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3037 of 2007()


1. HANEEFA, S/O.ABUBAKER HAJI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.SASINDRAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :09/10/2007

 O R D E R
                                R.BASANT, J.
                             ----------------------
                        Crl.M.C.No.3037 of 2007
                       ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 9th day of October 2007

                                  O R D E R

The petitioner faces allegations under Section 393 I.P.C. He

was granted bail by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasargod

subject to conditions. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has

insisted that the sureties must produce solvency certificates. The

petitioner has remained in custody from 12/9/2007. The order

granting bail was passed on 20/9/2007. Because of the insistence by

the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate that the sureties must produce

solvency certificates to prove their solvency, the petitioner is not able

to get himself released on bail. The petitioner is in custody. He has

no one to look after his interests outside. If it were insisted that the

petitioner’s sureties must produce solvent sureties, the petitioner will

have to languish in prison for a long period of time. In these

circumstances, the petitioner has come to this court with the prayer

that insistence on production of solvency certificates rigidly may be

dispensed with. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate may be

directed to consider the solvency of the sureties on the basis of

whatever materials are produced by them and if satisfied, may be

accepted without ritualistically insisting on production of solvency

certificates. This, in short, is the plea raised.

Crl.M.C.No.3037/07 2

2. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor and a

report was called for from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The

learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has no history of

any criminal antecedents. The learned Public Prosecutor, in these

circumstances, submits that the State has no objection if rigid

insistence on production of solvency certificates is not made.

3. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am

satisfied that the request of the petitioner can be accepted. It is

directed that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate need not rigidly

and ritualistically insist on production on solvency certificates. If the

sureties of the petitioner produce adequate materials to instill the

requisite satisfaction in the mind of the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate that the sureties are sufficient and adequate, the learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate may accept such sureties. Production of

solvency certificates need not then be insisted.

4. This petition is accordingly allowed to the above extent.

Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the

petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3037/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.3037/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007