Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

K.C.Jayanth vs State Of Kerala on 30 May, 2007

Author: R.Basant

Bench: R.Basant

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1684 of 2007()


1. K.C.JAYANTH, AGED 47 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.K.SREEJITH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :30/05/2007

 O R D E R






                          R. BASANT, J.

           -------------------------------------------------

                 CRL.M.C.NO. 1684 OF 2007

           -------------------------------------------------

           Dated this the  30th day of May, 2007



                              ORDER

The petitioner is an accused in a prosecution for the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.377 read with Sec.511 of the IPC. It would appear that the crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he had exploited young children by showing phonographic films. The TV, VCP etc., seized in the case were allegedly used for committing such offence. The petitioner applied for release of those articles as per Annexure-A1(2), the learned Magistrate by Annexure-A2 order refused the said prayer and rejected the application.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that release has been claimed only of the TV, VCP, remote control and the wire. These have nothing to do with the offence proper. The articles applied for are not the video CRL.M.C.NO. 1684 OF 2007 -: 2 :- tapes which were allegedly shown to the children. In these circumstances, continued retention of these costly articles in court is likely to lead to their damage and deterioration. These are not in any way likely to be relevant as evidence in this case. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the prayer for release allowed.

3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not seriously oppose the said prayer. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that this petition can be allowed, the impugned order set aside and the learned Magistrate directed to release the articles in question to the petitioner subject to appropriate conditions to be stipulated by the learned Magistrate.

4. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly allowed to the above extent.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge