JOHN ESTHAPPAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution under the provisions of the Wild Life Protection Act. They preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge admitted the appeal and suspended the sentence subject to conditions. Interalia a condition is imposed that each of the accused must deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the fine amount. The petitioners have now come before this court complaining about the imposition of the said condition.

(2.) There is no contention that the learned Sessions Judge has no jurisdictional competence to impose that condition. Even the impugned judgment passed by the trial court which is availed in the appeal is not produced before this court and there is no contention that the discretion to direct deposit of fine has been exercised wrongly. The short contention raised is that the petitioners are too poor and cannot pay the amounts. If insistence on payment of the said amounts were made, the petitioners would face the unfortunate predicament of the sentence being executed against them even before their appeal is taken up for consideration.

(3.) Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am satisfied that though the condition imposed does not warrant interference, appropriate directions can be issued in favour of the petitioners.