The High Court of Kerala dismissed a Crl.M.C. challenging a condition requiring 30% vehicle value deposit. The Court held the condition, based on a Full Bench decision, could not be interfered with under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The Crl.M.C. is 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 2346 OF 2014
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 2001/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -II,THAMARASSERY
PETITIONER/S/ACCUSED:
SANTHOSHKUMAR
S/O.BHASKARAN, VELUTHEDATH , MANASSERY AMSOM DESOM,
KOZHIKODE
BY ADV SMT.T.V.NEEMA
RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT:
THE STATE OF KERALA
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, (SHO MUKKOM POLICE STATION)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SR.PP.RENJITH GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 2346 OF 2014
2
O R D E R
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2023
This Crl.M.C. is filed challenging the conditions in Annexure A1 order by which the petitioner’s vehicle, seized in connection with the offences under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, was directed to be released. The petitioner is aggrieved by the condition requiring him to deposit 30% of the value of the vehicle.
CRL.MC NO. 2346 OF 2014
3
for the balance value of the vehicle. The impugned order having been passed in terms of the Full Bench decision, cannot be interfered by exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
For the aforementioned reasons, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE
RK
4
CRL.MC NO. 2346 OF 2014
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2346/2014
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.07.2013
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the condition of depositing 30% of the vehicle's value in an order releasing a seized vehicle can be challenged under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shan v. State of KeralaFollowed¶19
Shan v. State of Kerala, 2010 (3) KLT 413
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SanthosHKumar
The State of Kerala
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court