Left at his wit’s end, he had protested against the order before the magistrate but the judicial officer cited legal provisions to “ensure” protection of a case property. The magistrate maintained that if he wanted his cycle back, he would have to furnish a security bond of Rs 15,000 as precondition of its release.

Aggrieved, Pappu filed a revision petition before a sessions court. The move has paid off — calling the magistrate’s order unreasonable, the judge, in a recent order, reduced the bond money to Rs 1,000.

Allowing Pappu’s plea, Additional Sessions Judge Nivediata Anil Sharma observed that Rs 15,000 as security bond was “definitely” on the higher side and “excessive”, for a new bicycle of a similar make was available for Rs 2,000.

“It is a settle law that not only a vehicle should be released but is to be released on conditions that are just and reasonable,” the judge noted. “No useful purpose is served by keeping the bicycle seized as it is bound to get damaged with time.”

ASJ Sharma also observed that though the condition of a vehicle was not an issue while asking for a bond, the reasonableness of the order is certainly relevant.

Dismissing the prosecution’s contentions that the high amount was kept for securing the bicycle as and when required during the trial, the court held that the magistrate’s order could be said to be suffering from legal infirmity, liable to be set aside.