Allowed

M.B.Kunjumuhammed v. District Collector, Ernakulam and Others

Kerala HC24 Jan 2008Crl.MC/232/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought interim custody of a mini lorry seized under the Kerala Protection of River Banks Act. The Court held that the Magistrate could treat the application as a report of seizure. The Court ordered the release of the vehicle on deposit of security and furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Released the mini lorry to the petitioner on interim custody upon depositing a cash security of Rs. 25,000 or furnishing a bank guarantee and executing a bond for Rs. 1,50,000 with two solvent suretie

M.B.Kunjumuhammed Vs District Collector, Ernakulam and… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 232 of 2008()

¶6

¶7

CRIME NO. 1148/2007 of CHENGAMANAD POLICE STATION

¶8

PETITIONER: PETITIONER

¶9

¶10

M.B.KUNJUMUHAMMED, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. BAVU, MULANGATH HOUSE, PALAPRASSERY, CHENGAMANAD VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶12

SMT. P. PRIYA DEVI P

¶13

SMT. LEKSHMI SWAMINATHEN

¶14

RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS

¶15

¶16

DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

¶17

DIRECTOR,

¶18

DEPARTMENT OF MINING & GEOLOGY, COCHIN.

¶19

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGAMANAD.

¶20

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶21

BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶24

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C. No. 232 of 2008

¶25

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated: 24-1-2008

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Petitioner who is the owner of a vehicle bearing Reg. No. KL-4G

¶28

8131, seeks interim custody of the same. The vehicle was seized by the S.I of Police on 24-12-2007 alleging that sand was illegally transported in the vehicle in contravention of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks & Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 (“the Act” for short). The petitioner approached the J.F.C.M., Aluva for interim custody of the vehicle which was seized by the Sub Inspector of Police, Chengamanad Police Station but his request for interim custody was declined by the Magistrate holding that since the vehicle was not produced before Court and no report was forwarded under Sec. 102 (3) Cr.P.C. by any police officer, the application for interim custody filed under Sec. 457 Cr.P.C. was not maintainable. Hence this Petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C.

¶29

Even in cases where the seized vehicle is not produced before the Magistrate nor is the seizure reported to the Magistrate, the application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. by the person aggrieved can be treated as a report of seizure. In as much as this Court has granted interim custody of vehicles seized under the provisions of the said Act, I see no reason why this vehicle also should not be released on interim custody, particularly in the light of the decision reported in

¶30

CRL. M.C.NO. 232/2008 : 2 :

¶31

AIR 2003 SC 638 - Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of

¶32

Gujrat. Accordingly, the Mini lorry in question shall be released to the petitioner on interim custody on his depositing either a cash security of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) or furnishing bank guarantee for the said amount and on his executing a bond for Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the J.F.C.M., Aluva without insisting on solvency certificate and subject to the following conditions.

¶33