MOOSAKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER
The second accused in OR No.07 of 2020 of Forest Range Office, Kalikavu registered u/s 2(1), (16), (33), (36), 9, 39, 42, 43, 50 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (for short'the Act') sought in C.M.P.No.352 of 2020 for interim release of vehicle No.KL-55U-3400 owned by him invoking Section 451 of Cr.P.C.
2. While allowing the petition by order dated
18.7.2020, the learned Magistrate (Forest Offences) Manjeri directed the petitioner to furnish cash security of Rs.2,00,000/-. The petitioner being aggrieved by the above condition, seeks to set it aside by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s.482 of Cr.P.C.
3. The grievance expressed by the petitioner is confined to the condition No.1 by which he was made liable to deposit an amount of Rs.2 lakhs as cash security as condition precedent for release of the vehicle. He has no grievance in respect of any of the other conditions imposed by the order.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. It is contended that there is no provision in the Act or in Section 451 of Cr.P.C which empowers the court to direct deposit of cash security or furnish bank guarantee for interim relea
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.