High Court Kerala High Court

Mani Deepa vs State Of Kerala on 19 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Mani Deepa vs State Of Kerala on 19 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1139 of 2010()


1. MANI DEEPA, D/O. KANNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.VASUMATHI, D/O. KUNHIRAMAN,

                        Vs



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

2. P.P.MANOJ, S/O.BHASKARAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :19/05/2010

 O R D E R
                  *Crl.M.C.*RAMKUMAR,*J.2010*
                    * * *V. * * * * * * *
                          *                 * * *
                  * * * * * * *No.*1139*of* * * * *
                               *   * * *
             Dated, this the 19th day of May, 2010

                               ORDER

Petitioners are the sureties of the 2nd respondent herein

who was allowed interim custody of an indigo car bearing Reg.

No. KL/13/L/3321. Consequent on the second respondent failing

to produce the car before Court, proceedings were initiated

against the petitioners by the J.F.C.M. I, Kannur. The bond

amount was Rs. 1,00,000/-. As per Annexure A3 Order dated 11-

8-2008 the J.F.C.M. I, Kannur imposed the entire bond amount

of Rs. 1,00,000/- as penalty on each of the petitioners. Aggrieved

by the said order, the petitioner preferred Crl.A. No. 433 of

2009 before the Sessions Court, Thalassery under Sec. 449

Cr.P.C. seeking an interim stay of the trial Court’s order. As per

the impugned order (Annexure A5) dated 29-9-2009 the learned

Sessions Judge has granted a stay on condition that each of the

petitioners deposits before the trial court a sum of Rs. 15,000/-

towards penalty. It is the said order which is assailed in this Crl.

Crl.M.C. No. 1139 of 2010 -:2:-

M.C.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the petitioners are not in a position to pay the said amount and

that appropriate directions may be given to the Sessions Court to

dispose of the appeal itself after exempting the petitioners from

the payment of interim penalty.

3. I am unable to agree with the above submissions. I

am, however, inclined to give the petitioners further time to

deposit the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only)

fixed by the Sessions Court. The petitioners are given three

months time from today to deposit the penalty amount.

This Crl. M.C. is disposed of as above.

Dated this the 19th day of May, 2010.

V. RAMKUMAR,
(JUDGE)