Dismissed

M.Ummer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Mar 2008Crl.MC/781/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking interim custody of a vehicle. The Court held that since investigation was ongoing and prima facie allegations of illegal use existed, the Magistrate was justified in refusing custody pending further findings.

What did the court decide?

Petition for interim custody of the vehicle dismissed without prejudice to right to move again if investigation fails to strengthen suspicion.

M.Ummer Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 781 of 2008()

¶6

-----------------------CMP.6093/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

M.UMMER, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, SHAMIYAS, MUDANGALITHAZHEPARAMBU, PANNIYANKARA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE - 673 003.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZE

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶17

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C. No. 781 of 2008**

¶18

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 06-03-2008**

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner who claims to be the registered owner of a Scorpio Car bearing Reg. No. KL-11-U-7669 involved in Crime No. 256 of 2007 of Town Police Station, Kozhikode, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 363, 342 and 323 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. challenges Annexure IV order dated 1-1-2008 in C.M. P. No. 6093 of 2007 passed by the Magistrate dismissing the petitioner's application for interim custody sought under Sec. 451 Cr.P.C.

¶21

The learned Magistrate dismissed the application in view of the fact that the involvement of the petitioner though not made an accused in the case yet, is being investigated and that it was alleged that the petitioner used to hire the vehicle for illegal activities for making profit. The Magistrate was also of the view that the vehicle cannot be released on interim custody at this stage of investigation.

¶22

The Magistrate is fully justified in dismissing the petition. In case the complicity and antecedents of the petitioner is revealed by the investigation and the allegation prima facie made is true, then there is the possibility of the vehicle again being used for illicit

¶23

-:2:-

¶24

activities. If, on the other hand, the suspicion regarding involvement of the petitioner and the vehicle is unfounded, then the vehicle would be released on interim custody in the light of the decision of the Apex Court reported in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of

¶25

Gujrat - 2003 (2) KLT 1089 (SC).

¶26

This Crl. M.C. is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move for interim custody again in case the investigation does not strengthen the suspicion regarding the involvement of the petitioner in the criminal activity with regard to the vehicle in question .

¶27

V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE)

¶28

ani.

M.Ummer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ummer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh & Others Vs State of Kerala

C.N.Prasannakumar Vs State of Kerala

Vilasini Vs Vijayamma

Sobhana Vs Mohanan

Mathew Vs Jessintha

Tomy Thomas Vs Consulate General of India