Partly allowed

Muhammed Noufal v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2015Crl.MC/1245/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the modification of security conditions imposed on a petitioner seeking interim custody of a vehicle seized under the Sand Act. The Court reduced the required cash deposit from Rs. 50,000 to 1/4th of the vehicle's assessed value.

What did the court decide?

The condition directing a cash deposit of Rs. 50,000/- is modified to require a deposit of 1/4th of the value of the vehicle.

Muhammed Noufal Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/20TH PHALGUNA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1245 of 2015 ()

¶6

IN CMP 4042/2014 of J.M.F.C.-II, ALUVA DATED CRIME NO. 1023/2013 OF ALUVA WEST POLICE STATION (ALANGAD) , ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

MUHAMMED NOUFAL AGED 26 YEARS S/O.ABDUL SALAM, CHETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MATTUPURA MANNAM (P.O.), N.PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM (DIST.)

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED

¶10

SRI.V.S.MANSOOR

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

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

¶13

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE. P.

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No. 1245 of 2015 ()

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

ANNEXURE A: A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF VEHICLE BEARING NO. KL-05-U-8019.

¶19

ANNEXURE B: A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SALE LETTER.

¶20

ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 04/02/2015 IN C.M.P.NO. 4042 OF 2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ALUVA.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE sab

P.UBAID, J.

Crl. M.C No.1245 of 2015

¶26

Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2015.

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

The petitioner herein claims to be the registered owner of the vehicle KL-05-U-8019. The said vehicle was seized by the Aluva West Police in Crime No.1023 of 2013 registered under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. The vehicle was produced by the police before the Judicial First Class Magistrate court having jurisdiction. The petitioner filed an application under Section 457 Cr.PC as C.M.P No.4042 of 2014 for interim custody of the vehicle. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva granted interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner on certain conditions. The petitioner is aggrieved by some of the conditions. He seeks orders quashing these objectionable conditions. The condition No.2 imposed by the court below is that the petitioner shall make deposit of Rs.50,000/- as security. The petitioner is really aggrieved by this condition. The total value of the vehicle assessed is Rs.63,000/-. Then it is not known why the petitioner is directed

¶29

Crl. M.C No.1245 of 2015 2

¶30

to deposit Rs. 50,000/- as security. This court has settled the position recently, after the introduction of Section 23(A) in the Sand Act, that in such matters the judicial Magistrate deciding application for interim custody will have discretion in the imposing conditions. It appears that the latest decision was not brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate in this matter. On a consideration of the entire materials including value of the vehicle, I find that direction to deposit 1/4^th of the value of the vehicle would be appropriate. All other conditions will have to continue in force.

¶31

In the result, this petition is allowed in part. The second condition imposed by the court below as per the order dated 4.2.2015 in C.M.P No.4042 of 2014 directing the petitioner herein to make a cash deposit of Rs.50,000/- is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall make deposit of 1/4^th of the value of the vehicle assessed by the Motor Vehicle Inspector.

¶32

P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶33

sab

Muhammed Noufal v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Noufal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narayanan Vs State of Kerala

Kunjubava @ Babu Vs Kunjalavi

Dr K Mahesh Menon Vs Hatis Core Engineering Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Abhilash A.C Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh P. Vs State of Kerala

Lijo Vs State of Kerala