Bail conditions must be proportionate to the circumstances and liabilities of multiple accused parties should be reasonably apportioned.

ORDER

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.709/2022 of Kollam West Police Station which was registered against the petitioner and other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 294(b), 506, 427, 323, 353, 332 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 3(1) and 3(2)(e) of Prevention of Damages of the Public Properties Act, 1984. The petitioner was arrested as part of the investigation of the said case and he was released as per Annexure A3 order dated 13.10.2022 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court III, Kollam subject to certain conditions. One of the conditions was that, the petitioner shall furnish cash security for Rs.35,000/- (Rupees thirty five thousand only) before the court which was the estimated loss of the public property. The petitioner filed this Crl.M.C. challenging Annexure A3 order to the extent it imposes the condition of deposit of Rs.35,000/-.

2. Heard Sri.Manu Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S. Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The specific contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, there are about 60 accused persons in this case and the total loss estimated by the authorities concerned was only Rs.35,000/- and despite the same the petitioner was directed to deposit the entire amount. When the matter came up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that, some of the accused persons have approached the Additional Sessions Court II, Kollam for anticipatory bail which was originally granted by imposing condition of similar nature. Later, Crl.M.P. No.1781/2022 for modification of the said condition was filed by the petitioners therein and it was allowed as per order dated 18.10.2022, wherein the learned Sessions Judge after taking note of the fact that there are 60 accused persons in the case, directed the deposit of cash security of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each instead of Rs.35,000/-.

4. After perusing the records, I am of the view that, the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge seems to be reasonable. Therefore, I am of view that, this Crl.M.C. can be disposed by imposing a condition of similar nature. This is particularly because, since the total number of accused persons is 60 and the amount of loss is only Rs.35,000/-, there is no meaning in imposing deposit of Rs.35,000/- each by all the accused. The purpose behind imposition of condition of deposit of the amount is to ensure that the loss sustained to the public exchequer is recovered. As observed by the learned Sessions Judge in the order referred above, there are 60 accused persons in total and the liability can therefore be apportioned among them.

In such circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, condition No.2 in Annexure A3 is modified by reducing the amount to be deposited by the petitioner as Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) instead of Rs.35,000/- as ordered by the learned Magistrate.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE

scs

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7244/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.709/2022 OF POLICE STATION OF KOLLAM WEST, KOLLAM DISTRICT Annexure A2 THE CUSTODY APPLICATION FILED BY THE

2ND RESPONDENT IN ANN.A1 FIR BEFORE JFMC-III, KOLLAM Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED

13.10.2022 IN CMP NO.644/2022 BY JFMC-

III, KOLLAM