High Court Kerala High Court

Suresh Khimraj Ji Shah vs State Of Kerala on 11 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Suresh Khimraj Ji Shah vs State Of Kerala on 11 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2018 of 2008()


1. SURESH KHIMRAJ JI SHAH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VIJU THOMAS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/06/2008

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                      ------------------------------------
                     Crl.M.C. No.2018 of 2008
                      -------------------------------------
               Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008

                                  ORDER

Petitioner is the defacto complainant in a prosecution for

offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 120 B, 395 and

201 I.P.C. Altogether there are 7 accused persons. Accused 2, 3,

5 and 6 have been found guilty, convicted and sentenced.

Accused No.1 expired during the pendency of the proceedings.

Accused No.4 was found not guilty and acquitted. Accused No.7

was not available for trial. He was absconding. The case against

him was split up and was refiled.

2. Against the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence, an

appeal has been preferred before this Court and that is pending

as Crl.Appeal No.901 of 2008. In the judgment of the court below,

there is a direction to return M.Os 8 and M.Os 13 to 146 which

are gold ornaments belonging to the petitioner herein to him. He

was held entitle to get back the gold ornaments. The gold

ornaments, being valuables belonging to PW4, were directed to

be returned to him after the appeal period is over. All other M.Os

were directed to be disposed of after the appeal period is over

and after the split up case-S.C.No.93 of 2008 is disposed of. No

Crl.M.C. No.2018 of 2008 2

person has preferred any appeal against the direction under

Section 452 Cr.P.C to return the gold ornaments M.O 8 and M.Os

13 to 146 to the petitioner herein.

3. To be doubly sure, notice was given to the learned

counsel for the appellants in Crl.Appeal No.901 of 2008, ie.

accused 2, 3, 5 and 6. Their counsel submits that they have no

objection against the release of the articles to the petitioner

herein straightaway.

4. The learned Magistrate had directed release of the

gold ornaments to the petitioner pending disposal of the appeal

on condition that the petitioner must produce bank guarantee for

an amount of Rs.1 crore. He was also directed to execute a bond

for Rs.2 lakhs with two solvent sureties. Aggrieved by that

condition, the petitioner came to this Court and by order dated

01.01.2007 in Crl.M.C.No.4093 of 2006 those conditions were

modified and it was directed that the said articles can be released

to the petitioner on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.1

crore with two solvent sureties each.

5. The petitioner has again come to this Court now with

the grievance that he is unable to comply even with that condition

Crl.M.C. No.2018 of 2008 3

and that consequently it has become impossible for him to take

back the articles from court. They are kept in the custody of the

court and are not released to the petitioner as he has not

executed the bond as directed.

6. Notice was given to the counsel for the appellants in

Crl.Appeal No.901 of 2008. Notice was given to the learned Public

Prosecutor also. The learned Public Prosecutor as well as the

counsel for accused 2, 3, 5 and 6 submit that they have

absolutely no objection against the release of the gold ornaments

to the petitioner herein subject to appropriate safeguards. It is

submitted that no one has any dispute about the entitlement of

the petitioner to take back the gold ornament from the custody of

the court. Considering all the circumstances, I am satisfied that

the said M.O 8 and M.Os 13 to 146 can now be directed to be

released to the petitioner notwithstanding the pendency of the

appeal on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.1 crore

without any sureties undertaking to produce the M.Os before

court as and when called for.

7. This Crl.M.C is accordingly allowed. It is directed that

M.O 8 and M.Os 13 to 146 can now be released to the petitioner

Crl.M.C. No.2018 of 2008 4

on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.1 crore without any

sureties undertaking to produce the said M.Os before court as and

when called for.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-