Partly allowed

Abdul Razak v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jan 2008Crl.MC/108/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a criminal miscellaneous application, modified a condition imposed on the petitioner for interim custody of a motor vehicle. The court deleted the requirement to furnish Rs. 25,000 cash security and ordered the Magistrate to insist on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties.

What did the court decide?

Deleted the condition to furnish cash security of Rs. 25,000; directed the Magistrate to insist on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties.

Abdul Razak Vs the State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 108 of 2008()

¶6

-----------------------CMP NO. 5206 OF 2007 ON THE FILES OF J.F.C.M- V, KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER: PETITIONER

¶8

¶9

R.M.ABDUL RAZAK, S/O KUNHIMARIYAM, MANALAPPA, THAZHEPEETHRAYIL HOUSE, FEROKE AMSOM, NALLUR DESOM, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ

¶11

RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT

¶12

¶13

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.108 of 2008

¶17

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2008

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner, who claims to be the registered owner of a Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing Registration Number KL 10M 8967, challenges the condition imposed by the J.F.C.M-V, Kozhikode, directing him to furnish cash security of Rs.25,000/while giving interim custody of the Motor Cycle to the petitioner.

¶20

According to the petitioner, the Motor Cycle of which he is the registered owner was taken from him by his friend, Haris, the 6^th accused in Crime No.328/2007 and that subsequently, the said Haris has been arrayed as the 8^th accused in the above crime for the alleged commission of an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Kerala Gaming Act.

¶21

The prosecution has no case that the petitioner has any connection with the offence. Under these circumstances, imposing a condition of furnishing cash security of Rs.25,000/may not be justified. Accordingly, the said condition is deleted and instead the learned Magistrate shall insist on the petitioner

¶22

¶23

Crl.M.C.No.108 of 2008

¶24

executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, subject to the following conditions:-

¶25

i) The petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle wholly or in part to any other person.

¶26

ii) The petitioner shall keep custody of the vehicle in the same condition in which it is released to him.

¶27

iii) The petitioner shall not allow the vehicle to be used for any illicit purpose.

¶28

iv) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the learned Magistrate as and when called upon to do so.

¶29

v) The interim custody of the vehicle given to the petitioner shall be subject to final orders by the appropriate authority.

¶30

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶31

Abdul Razak v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Razak v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajitha Pradeep Vs v.O.Joseph

Ranil Vs Vineetha Chandran

Roy Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Abraham Vs State of Kerala

V.Subramaniyan Vs State of Kerala

Kapa Venkara Ramana Naidu Vs State of Kerala & Anr.