IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2283 of 2009()
1. GEORGE JOSEPH @ JOLLY. S/O. JOSEPH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. AUGUSTINE, S/O. SEBASTIAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :19/02/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
===========================
CRL.M.C.No. 2283 OF 2009
===========================
Dated this the 19th day of February,2010
ORDER
As per order in M.P.1631/2009 petitioner,
the second accused was granted interim custody
of the articles sought for by him.
Subsequently petitioner filed M.P.1751/2009 for
release of some other articles seized and
produced in court, under section 451 of Code of
Criminal Procedure. The second respondent one
of the other accused also filed M.P.1679/2009
under section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure
for interim custody of some of the articles to
him. By Annexure IV order, learned Magistrate
directed the petitioner to produce all the
items got released by him earlier as per order
in I.A.1631/2009, holding that those items are
necessary to be produced before the court to
decide the claim raised by the second
Crl.M.C.2283/2009 2
respondent. This petition is filed under section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the
direction to produce the articles in Annexure 4
order.
2. Though notice was served on the second
respondent, he did not appear.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were
heard.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is only
against the direction in Annexure 4 order to
produce the articles which were earlier released to
him. Learned counsel submitted that the articles
sought to be released by the second respondent
under M.P.1679/2009 and by the petitioner in
M.P.1751/2009 are not the same articles which are
released to the petitioner earlier and hence there
was no necessity to produce those articles as
directed. Even if it is taken that the articles
sought for in M.P.1751/2009 and 1679/2009 are the
Crl.M.C.2283/2009 3
same articles earlier released in M.P.1631/2009, as
the learned Magistrate has already released those
articles to the petitioner, before finding that the
petitioner in M.P.1679/2009 is entitled to those
articles, learned Magistrate should not have
directed the petitioner to produce the articles in
court. Hence Annexure 4 order is quashed.
Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kochi is
directed to consider M.P.1751/2009 and
M.P.1679/2009 in accordance with law. Only if it is
found that second respondent the petitioner in
M.P.1679/2009 is entitled to get interim custody
of articles, which include those articles which
were earlier released to the petitioner, the
Magistrate is to direct the petitioner to produce
them. Annexure 4 order is modified accordingly.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
tpl/-
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
———————
W.P.(C).NO. /06
———————
JUDGMENT
SEPTEMBER,2006