Allowed

Jassim Muhammed Jabbar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Dec 2021Crl.MC/4395/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court modified cash security condition for releasing seized vehicle accused had to deposit Rs. 4.1 lakhs cash causing hardship allowed petitioner to provide property bond instead. Petitioner must execute bond with sureties and deposit title documents. Accused vehicle owner with no insurance had accident causing injury faced cash security demand. Court substituted cash deposit for property bon

What did the court decide?

Cash security of Rs. 4,10,000 modified to property bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with sureties and title deed submission.

Jassim Muhammed Jabbar Vs State of Kerala — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 4395 OF 2021

¶6

CMP 1223/2021 AND CMP NO. 1452/2021 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶8

JASSIM MUHAMMED JABBAR AGED 38 YEARS S/O. ABDUL JABBAR, KOLOTHU HOUSE, ALA DESOM, KOTHAPARAMBU, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680668.

¶9

BY ADV. ANWIN JOHN ANTONY

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE & PETITIONER IN C.M.P. NO. 1452/2021 BEFORE

¶11

JFCM, KODUNGALLUR:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

2 GEETHA AGED 52 YEARS W/O. KERALA PRASAD, MOOTHEDATH HOUSE, KOTHAKULAM, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680567.

¶14

BY SMT. POUSHPALATHA M.K., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.M.C.No.4395 OF 2021 2

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.224/2021 of Valapad police station which was registered alleging offence under Sections 278, 338 of the Indian Penal Code besides under Sections 134(a), 134(b) read with 187 and Section 196 of the Motor Vehicle Act. The cause of action had arisen on 07.03.2021. The Maruti car owned and driven by the petitioner had met with an accident, causing serious injuries to the second respondent. The vehicle was seized by the police and thereafter, produced before court and for getting it released, application was moved under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before court. The application was opposed by the mother of the injured and both the petitions were considered by the learned Magistrate and by order dated 05.07.2021, application for releasing the vehicle of the petitioner was allowed imposing certain conditions

¶19

The petitioner is now aggrieved by the first condition in the order. As a pre-condition for releasing the vehicle, he has been required to deposit an amount of Rs.4,10,000/-, as cash security which is the value of the vehicle assessed by the Regional

¶20

Crl.M.C.No.4395 OF 2021 3

¶21

Transport Officer.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶23

learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

According to the learned Public Prosecutor, the vehicle did not have insurance coverage, that the injured has suffered head

¶25

injury, that treatment expenses alone came to nearly Rs.2,00,000/-, that the value of the vehicle was assessed by the Regional Transport Officer and that was how, the petitioner was required to make a security deposit of Rs. 4,10,000/- .

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is unable to arrange that much money immediately, his sister's marriage is scheduled and, that instead of cash security he is prepared to give property security.

¶27

After hearing counsel on both sides, I am also of the opinion that the direction to make a security deposit of Rs. 4,10,000/- will cause considerable hardship to the petitioner, despite the fact that the vehicle was not insured at the time of the occurrence. Still the petitioner undertakes that he will provide property security which is free from any encumbrance.

¶28

Therefore, condition No. 1 shall stand modified; the

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.4395 OF 2021 4

¶30

vehicle shall be released on the petitioner executing a bond for Rs. 5,00,000/-, with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court and also on producing and depositing the original title deed of the property of the petitioner along with a non-encumbrance certificate and an affidavit affirming that the property is free from any charge or liability, before the court within a period of two weeks. It is made clear that the documents shall be returned only after the final settlement of the compensation claim of the injured.

¶31

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

SD/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE

DCS/01.12.2021

Crl.M.C.No.4395 OF 2021 5

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE

¶39

ANNEXURE A1

¶40

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 05.07.2021 IN CMP NO. 1223 OF 2021 AND CMP NO. 1452 OF 2021 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR.

Jassim Muhammed Jabbar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jassim Muhammed Jabbar 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

Krishnadas Vs State of Kerala

Raveendran Vs State of Kerala

Rekha Vs State of Kerala

Sajeev Mathew Vs the State of Kerala

Sreeraj Vs Shalji

Sarafudheen.T., Vs State of Kerala