Allowed

L and T Micro Finance v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Oct 2019Crl.MC/3357/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition filed by a third party accused under Section 394 IPC, deleting the condition to execute a bond with sureties for releasing seized funds. The court accepted the petitioner's offer to furnish a bank guarantee instead.

What did the court decide?

The condition to execute a bond with two solvent sureties for Rs.50,000/- is deleted; instead, the petitioner must furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.39,300/- to release the money.

L and T Micro Finance Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 25TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3357 OF 2019(H)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 4203/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ATTINGAL (TEMPORARY)

¶7

CRIME NO.1369/2018 OF Kallambalam Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

L & T MICRO FINANCE REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-LITIGATION 00 NIRMAL RAJ R.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJESH

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA

¶13

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶14

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶15

BY SRI C S HRITHWIK- SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC.No.3357 OF 2019(H) 2

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Dated this the 17th day of October 2019

¶20

The petitioner herein is a third party in the case

¶21

registered as Crime No.1369/2018 of Kallambalam Police Station under Section 394 IPC.

¶22

The prosecution case is that, on 02.10.2018, at about 13.45 hours, the accused persons snatched away the bag containing an amount of Rs.39,300/- (Rupees thirty nine thousand and three hundred only) from the possession of the de facto complainant, who was working as an Associate Officer of the petitioner company.

¶23

The petitioner filed an application in the Magistrate's Court concerned, under Section 451 Cr.P.C, for releasing the money to the company. As per Annexure-III order, learned Magistrate allowed the application on certain conditions. One of the conditions was that the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount. The petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid condition imposed by the learned Magistrate. The prayer in this petition is to delete the aforesaid condition.

¶24

Crl.MC.No.3357 OF 2019(H) 3

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶26

Only on furnishing some kind of security, the money could be released to the petitioner. That is the reason why the learned Magistrate imposed a condition as noticed above. However, at the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is ready to furnish bank guarantee for the amount which is ordered to be released to the company, instead of executing any bond. Learned counsel submitted that it is difficult for the company to obtain sureties.

¶27

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶28

I find that the offer for furnishing security in the nature of bank guarantee can be accepted and the condition regarding execution of the bond can be deleted.

¶29

Consequently, the petition is disposed of as follows:

¶30

The condition in Annexure-III order that, the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, is deleted. Instead of execution of any bond, the petitioner shall furnish bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.39,300/- (Rupees thirty nine thousand and three hundred only) in the court below. On furnishing such bank guarantee

¶31

Crl.MC.No.3357 OF 2019(H) 4

¶32

and on complying with the other conditions mentioned in Annexure-III order, the money shall be released to the petitioner company.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

ajt

¶37

Crl.MC.No.3357 OF 2019(H) 5

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

ANNEXURE 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1369 OF 2018.

¶41

ANNEXURE 11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 451 OF CRPC ANNEXURE III THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24/12/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE.

L and T Micro Finance v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L and T Micro Finance v. 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

Mohammed Suhail.v Vs State of Kerala

Alam Mohd.Shah Vs State of Kerala

Maneesh Vs State of Kerala

Monu Vs State of Kerala

K.P.Yousuf Vs State of Kerala

Krishna Prasad Vs State of Kerala