SUBHO ADHIKARI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 1185 of 2017 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station which was re-registered as Crime No.266/CR/OCWII/EKM/2017 of CBCID OCWII registered for the offences under sections 120B, 379, 420, 468 and 471 IPC and section 66(C)(D) of the IT Act. He was granted bail by the learned Magistrate subject to certain conditions. Conditions 1 to 3 as follows :

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) The learned Magistrate has directed that the sureties of the petitioner shall be Keralites and they shall produce their title deeds. This is illegal. The court cannot make a distinction between Keralites and people of other states. The direction that the sureties shall produce their title deeds cannot be said to be unreasonable. If the learned Magistrate is satisfied that the sureties have properties, their title deeds shall be returned to them. Coming to the second condition, the direction of the learned Magistrate to the sureties that they shall provide a shelter to the accused in Ernakulam till the completion of the trial is without jurisdiction and it is illegal. It is liable to be set aside. The third condition is that the petitioner shall not leave the limits of Ernakulam Town North Police station without prior permission of the learned Magistrate. The petitioner has come to Kerala from West Bengal in search of a job. It is submitted that the direction will disable to him from doing any work outside the limits of the Ernakulam Town North Police Station. Having regard to this fact, I am inclined to direct that it is sufficient that the petitioner appears before the investigating officer every Friday between 4 and 5 P.M till the final report is filed or for or six months, whichever is earlier.