JOSE JOHN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims to be the owner of a mini lorry which is allegedly involved in the illicit transportation of river sand. The vehicle was seized by the police. The petitioner applied for release of the vehicle under Sec.451 of the Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, granted the said request subject to conditions. One of the conditions imposed is that the petitioner must produce bank guarantee for Rs.2 lakhs. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the said direction.

(2.) What is the grievance? The learned Magistrate was obliged to impose such a condition because the learned Magistrate found that on an earlier occasion the vehicle had been released to the petitioner for the identical offence. It is after getting release of such vehicle, that a similar crime has again been committed using that vehicle. In any view of the matter, I am satisfied that the learned Magistrate was justified in imposing onerous and strict conditions for release of the vehicle.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that insistence on bank guarantee is virtually depriving the petitioner, a person without sufficient means, of the opportunity to take advantage of the order granting release of the vehicle. Insistence on bank guarantee may not be made. The petitioner may be permitted to make appropriate other guarantee/document available before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner may be permitted to get bonds of sufficient and solvent sureties and claim release of the vehicle, prays the learned counsel for the petitioner.