Allowed

Shahitha Seeravalappil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Nov 2022Crl.MC/7691/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala quashed an order dismissing a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking release of gold ingots converted from stolen ornaments. The Court held that non-party status of a co-accused was not fatal and conversion of shape did not bar release where police and prosecution had no objection.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order; directed the court below to release gold ingots to the petitioner subject to conditions preventing sale/transfer until trial culmination.

Shahitha Seeravalappil Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 7691 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST C.M.P.NO.265/2021 IN CC.NO.403/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT,PAYYANNUR

¶7

PETITIONERS/CW3 & CW4:

¶8

1 SHAHITHA SEERAVALAPPIL, AGED 45 YEARS W/O ASHARAF, KUTTOOR AMSOM DESOM, KUTTOOR P.O, PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DT. , PIN - 670306

¶9

2 AFSANA SEERAVALAPPIL, AGED 24 YEARS D/O ASHARAF, KUTTOOR AMSOM, DESOM, KUTTOOR P.O, PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DT., PIN - 670306

¶10

BY ADVS. O.V.MANIPRASAD JOSE ANTONY SRUTHYMON P.R

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERINGOME POLICE STATION PERINGOME P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670353

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SMT T V NEEMA-SR PP

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 7691 OF 2022

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Annexure-A7 order passed under Section 451 Cr.P.C is under challenge.

¶21

2 . The 1 st petitioner is CW3 / defacto complainant.

¶22

The 2 nd petitioner/CW4 is her daughter. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 380, 454, 461 and 411 of IPC.

¶23

3 . The prosecution case, among other things, is

¶24

that the accused trespassed into the house of the petitioner, CW4 and committed theft of the gold ornaments as well as cash. Thereafter, the gold ornaments were converted into gold ingots and they were seized by the Police from CWs 10 and 13. The petitioner preferred CMP No.265/2021 for release of the gold ingots. The court below, after hearing both sides, dismissed the application, as per Annexure-A7 order. The said order is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.

¶25

4 . I have heard Sri.O.V.Maniprasad, the learned

¶26

¶27

CRL.MC NO. 7691 OF 2022

¶28

counsel for the petitioners and Smt.T.V.Neema, the

¶29

learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

¶30

5 . The court below dismissed the application mainly on two grounds. (i) the gold ornaments were stolen from the possession of the petitioner as well as from CW4 but CW4 is not made a party to the application filed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C (ii) since the gold ornaments were converted into gold ingots. Even if it is released, the petitioner cannot use the same and it is better to keep the same in the chest of the court.

¶31

6 . Paragraph 8 of the order would show that the Police has expressed their no objection in releasing the gold ingots to the petitioner. The prosecution has also no objection to the same. There are no rival claims. For

¶32

the simple reason that CW4 was not made a party, the court below ought not have rejected the CMP. That apart, the fact that the gold ornaments were converted to gold ingots, is not a ground to deny the relief sought for.

¶33

¶34

CRL.MC NO. 7691 OF 2022

¶35

7 . The learned counsel for the petitioners

¶36

submitted that CW4 has no objection in releasing the gold ornaments to the petitioner / CW3. Moreover, she has been made as a party to this Crl.M.C.

¶37

8 . In these circumstances, the impugned order

¶38

stands set aside. The court below is directed to release the gold ornaments / gold ingots to the 1 st petitioner on such terms and conditions as it deem fit to impose upon.

¶39

Needless to say, the court below shall impose condition that the petitioner shall not transfer / sell or change the character of the gold ingots till the culmination of the trial and that the petitioner shall produce the same as and when directed.

¶40

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

¶41

Sd/- DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

¶42

¶43

CRL.MC NO. 7691 OF 2022

¶44

¶45

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7691/2022

¶46

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

¶47

ANNEXURE A1	A TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED TO THE 2N SHAFI .S.V, THE BRO PETITIONER	F.I STATEMENT D RESPONDENT BY THER OF THE 1ST
ANNEXURE A2	A TRUE COPY OF THE 5/2019 OF PERINGOME	F.I.R IN CRIME NO. POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE A3	A TRUE COPY OF THE TO MAGISTRATE BY TH 10.05.2019 PRODUCIN	LIST OF PROPERTY SENT E 2ND RESPONDENT ON G THE GOLD INGOTS
ANNEXURE A4	A TRUE COPY OF CMP 29.10.2019	NO. 8792/2019 DATED
ANNEXURE A5	A TRUE COPY OF THE IN C.M.P NO. 8792/2 FIRST CLASS MAGISTR	ORDER DATED 01.11.2019 019 OF THE JUDICIAL ATE COURT, PAYYANNUR
ANNEXURE A6	A TRUE COPY OF CMP	NO. 265/2021
ANNEXURE A7	A TRUE COPY OF THE IN CMP NO.265/2021 THE JUDICIAL FIRST COURT, PAYYANNUR	ORDER DATED 28.01.2021 IN C.C NO. 403/2020 OF CLASS MAGISTRATE

Shahitha Seeravalappil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahitha Seeravalappil 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

K.N.Raju Vs Inspector, K.C.W.R. & W.F.Board

Febina K.A Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Kabeer Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Iype Mathew Vs Ebin Mathew Iype (Minor)

Anoop Mathew Vs the State of Kerala

Abhijith Vs State of Kerala