Dismissed

Arif v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Feb 2017Crl.MC/1057/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the non-reporting of his seized vehicle to the Magistrate under S. 102 Cr.P.C. The High Court directed the respondent to report to the Magistrate within three days and the Magistrate to decide on interim custody within seven days, referencing deposit conditions from cited precedents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to report to Magistrate within 3 days and Magistrate to decide on custody within 7 days; matter reported to competent authority for action.

Arif Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/25TH MAGHA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1057 of 2017 () ---------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ARIF S/O. HAMZA, AGED 38 YEARS, THAZHATHETHIL HOUSE, VALLAPPUZHA P.O., VALLAPPUZHA VILLAGE, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT (OWNER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-41-G-4999)

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.JITHIN VARGHESE

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682 031.

¶11

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOLATHUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 678 001.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 1057 of 2017 () ---------------------------

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MAHASSAR DTED 3.2.2017 PREPARED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

¶18

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 17.1.2017 IN CRL.M.C NO. 21/2017.

¶19

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P. A. TO JUDGE

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

Crl. M. C. No. 1057 of 2017

¶25

Dated this the 14^th day of February, 2017

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

The vehicle belonging to the petitioner herein bearing Registration No.KL-41-G-4999 was seized by the 2^nd respondent on 03.02.2017 on an allegation that it was used for transporting granite building stone in violation of the provisions of Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules 2015 and Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act.

¶28

The grievance of the petitioner herein is that, the vehicle is still in the custody of the 2^nd respondent who has not duly produce the vehicle nor reported the matter to the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 102 Cr.P.C. to enable the petitioner herein to seek custody of the vehicle.

¶29

Having considered the limited prayer now sought in the petition, I am inclined to dispose of the Crl.M.C. with a direction that the respondent herein shall report the matter to the jurisdictional Magistrate within three working days from today, if not reported already. The learned Magistrate shall thereafter consider the application for interim custody, if any filed, as expeditiously as possible, within seven days from the date of

¶30

Crl. M. C. No. 1057 of 2017 2

¶31

filing. If the application is allowed, the court below shall impose such conditions as it may deem fit including a condition regarding the deposit of the original records as laid down in Anfar V. State of Kerala (2014 (4) KHC 210) and regarding the amount to be deposited, in accordance with the decision of this court in Writ Appeal No. 1889/2015 with appropriate modifications.

¶32

The matter shall also be reported to the competent authority under the Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules 2015 and Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act for the purpose of appropriate action and compounding if any. The release will be subject to confiscation proceedings, if any.

¶33

Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶36

Arif v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arif 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

Sasi Vs State of Kerala

Raveendra.M Vs State of Kerala

Abbas Vs the Sub Insepctor of Police

Sheeja Vs State of Kerala

B.Abdulla Vs State of Kerala

Rayees Vs State of Kerala