Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
LINSHAD KALLUVEETIL PARAMBIL SULAIMAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks interim custody of a seized vehicle. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. condition of bank guarantee deemed onerous. (Para 4) |
| 3. court relies on supreme court precedent for decision. (Para 5) |
O R D E R
Dated this the 24th day of February, 2026 The petitioner is the registered owner of a Lorry bearing Registration No.KL-18-D-0038. Alleging that the vehicle was used for committing the offences punishable under Sections 271 and 279 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 120(e) of the Kerala Police Act , the Investigating Officer in Crime No.2071/2025 of the Aluva East Police Station, seized the said vehicle.
2. Although the petitioner filed an application before the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva (the learned Magistrate), seeking the interim custody of the vehicle, by Annexure-II order, the learned Magistrate has allowed the application but subject to conditions. As per condition No.2 in the order, the petitioner has been directed to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.3,00,000/-. The said condition is onerous and unjustifiable. Hence, the Crl.M.C.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
