Disposed

Roby Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Dec 2016Crl.MC/8331/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the seizure of his excavator allegedly used for illegal mining. Court directed police to report the seizure to the Magistrate within three days for consideration of interim custody application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to report seizure to Magistrate within three days; Magistrate to consider interim custody application within seven days.

Roby Varghese Vs the State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 8331 of 2016 ()

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ROBY VARGHESE S/O VARGHESE, ERANGOTH HOUSE, THALAKKODE PO., PUTHANCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENT BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031

¶11

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VELLATHOOVAL POLICE STATION IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685563

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.R. DHANIL

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 8331 of 2016 () ---------------------------

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶17

ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.11.2016.

¶18

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE.

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J

¶24

¶25

Crl.M.C. No. 8331 of 2016

¶26

- - - - Dated 1^st December, 2016

¶27

¶28

ORDER

¶29

1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶30

2.The petitioner is the registered owner of a Hitachi Excavator. The said vehicle was seized on 27.11.2016 by the 2^nd respondent on the allegation that the same was used for excavation of red earth violating the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ('MMDR Act, 1957” for brevity) as well as the Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015, (for short the

¶31

“Transportation Rules,2015”). Annexure-A is the intimation said to have been given to the petitioner.

¶32

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the seizure has not so far been reported before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶33

4.Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the 2^nd

¶34

Crl.M.C. No.8331 of 2016 -2-

¶35

respondent is directed to report the seizure of the aforesaid vehicle before the jurisdictional Magistrate within three days from the receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Magistrate is directed to consider the application, if any, filed by the petitioner for interim custody of the aforesaid vehicle in accordance with law and pass orders on the same expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of seven days from the date of filing of the application.

¶36

The petition is disposed off as above.

¶37

Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE

¶38

kp/-1.12.16

Roby Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roby Varghese v. the 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

Siddque Vs State of Kerala

Mukesh Vs State of Kerala

Noufal Vs State of Kerala

E.P.Siyad Vs State of Kerala

Fazil Vs State of Kerala

Reghu Vs State of Kerala