This criminal miscellaneous case is filed by petitioners, who are accused Nos. 1, 2 and 6 to modify the condition imposed by the Sessions Judge in Crl.M.P.No.1644/2014 in Crime No.286/2014 of Pattanakkadu police station of Alappuzha District under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called ‘the Code’). 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1, 2 and 6 in Crime No.286/2014 of Pattanakkad police station, alleging commission of the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 341 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and they have moved for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, Alappuzha, and the Sessions Judge Alappuzha by Annexure-1 order allowed the application for anticipatory bail with conditions inter-alia directing the petitioners to deposit ₹10,000/- each before the concerned magistrate court for ensuring their presence during the trial proceedings. This condition is being challenged by the petitioners by filing this petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the learned Sessions Judge has imposed necessary conditions to ensure the presence of the petitioners for the purpose of interrogation as well as for the purpose of trial and as such there is no necessity to impose further condition of cash deposit for granting anticipatory bail.
5. The application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that there in no illegality in the order.
6. It is an admitted fact that, petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos. 1, 2 and 6 in Crime No.286/2014 of Pattanakkadu police station and as per Annexure-1 order, the learned Sessions Judge has granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners with conditions inter-alia that they shall deposit ₹10,000/- each before the concerned magistrate court for ensuring their presence during trial proceedings. There are other conditions imposed by the court below, which will be sufficient for procuring the presence of the petitioners as well. Further, it is seen from the cause title that petitioners are belonging to the same locality and there is nothing to indicate that they will not be available for interrogation or trial. So under the circumstances, insisting for cash security for granting bail is not necessary and that practice has been deprecated by this court in some of the decisions of this court as poverty of a person should not stand in the way of getting bail if he is otherwise entitled to get bail. So under the circumstances, this court feels that, there is no necessity to retain condition No.7 directing the petitioners to deposit ₹ 10,000/- each before the concerned magistrate court and that condition can be lifted.
So the criminal miscellaneous case is allowed to that extent and condition No.7 is lifted.
Sd/-
K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy// P.A. to Judge ss