The High Court rejected the Petitioner's challenge to the condition of depositing 30% of the vehicle's value imposed by the Magistrate, holding that the direction is lawful following precedent.
The petition challenging the 30% deposit direction was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.MC.No. 5385 of 2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
THURSDAY THE 06TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 15TH BHADRA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 5385 of 2018
IN CMP 5906/2017 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, THAMARASSERY
CRIME NO. 583/2017 OF Mukkom Police Station , Kozhikode
PETITIONER/S:
ABOOBACKER AGED 42 YEARS S/O KUNIYIL IMBICHALI, RESIDING AT KUNIYIL HOUSE, EDAKKARA P.O, CHELANNUR KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT, KERALA.
BY ADVS. G. SIVASANKAR JANI A JYOTHYKUMARI L
RESPONDENT/STATE :-
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUKKAM).
SRI.ALEX M THOMBRA SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The vehicle belonging to the petitioner
was allegedly used for committing the offences under
Crl.MC.No. 5385 of 2018
2
sections 20 and 21 of the Kerala Protection of River Bank and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. The application filed by him for release of the vehicle was allowed by the learned Magistrate by Annexure A3
order. One of the conditions is that he shall deposit 30% of the value of the vehicle and execute a bond for the balance amount. The direction to deposit the amount is challenged.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. Shan Vs. State of Kerala [210 (3) KLT
413 (F.B)]. A Division Bench of this court has held that when a vehicle involved such a case is released the court shall direct the claimant to deposit 30%
of the value of and executed a bond for the balance amount. It is accordance with this direction the
learned Magistrate has issued the direction. No interference is called for.
Accordingly, this Crl.M.C is dismissed.
Sd/-
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE
SMA
Crl.MC.No. 5385 of 2018
3
A P P E N D I X
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :-
ANNEXURE A 1 :- TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION.
ANNEXURE A2 :- TRUE COPY OF GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT.
ANNEXURE A3 :- CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 22.11.2017
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :- NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
SMA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the direction of 30% deposit of the vehicle's value imposed by the Magistrate under the Kerala Protection of River Bank and Regulation of Removal of Sand A
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shan Vs. State of KeralaApplied¶25
Shan Vs. State of Kerala [210 (3) KLT 413 (F.B)]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
ABOOBACKER
STATE OF KERALA
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW
Parties & counsel
