IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13121 of 2010(M)
1. MAHEEN SHERIEF, S/O.ESMAYIL KUTTY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUR TALUK,
4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.S.MANU
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :09/04/2010
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 13121 of 2010-M
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the registered owner of the goods carriage bearing
registration No.KL-11/H-1643. The 4th respondent registered Crime
No.130/2010 of Sasthamcotta Police Station under Section 21 of the Mines
Act, 1952 and section 188 IPC on the allegation that the first accused
therein with the permission of the petitioner, did mining of river sand from
Kallada river unlawfully and in violation of the prohibition order issued by
this Court and was transporting river sand in the petitioner’s vehicle. Ext.P2
is the copy of the FIR in the said case. After registering the crime the 4th
respondent, on 31.1.2010 seized the vehicle and the sand and seizure has
been reported to the District Collector, Kollam through the second
respondent.
2. The petitioner submits that he has not committed any crime as
alleged and his vehicle is not liable to be confiscated. The petitioner
approached the District Collector for release of the vehicle. But the second
respondent has not released the vehicle and no notice was also issued to the
petitioner. The petitioner submits that the seizure of the vehicle is highly
wpc 13121/2010 2
unjustified and illegal. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is
filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to release the petitioner’s
vehicle by way of interim custody.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Govt. Pleader.
There will be a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on the
request of the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle, within a period
of seven days from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, in the
light of the well settled principles laid down by this Court in various
decisions including Subramanyan v. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT 77)
and on such terms and conditions. The matter will be considered in
accordance with law. There will be a further direction to the first
respondent to pass final orders within a period of two months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner and after
considering the pleas raised by the petitioner, on merits.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/