IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28286 of 2008(P)
1. SHERAB T.M., S/O.MUTHU, THOTTATHIL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, FLYING SQUAD,
3. DEPUTY RANGER, PONGANAMKADU FOREST
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAJEEV
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :17/10/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.C.No. 28286 of 2008 P
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 17th day of October, 2008
JUDGMENT
A vehicle – Toyota Qualis car, KL 7/Z 123, belonging to
the petitioner was seized on 30.1.2008 on the allegation that it
was involved in transportation of sandal oil. The seizure was
reported to the Magistrate and an occurrence report was
registered at the concerned forest station. The petitioner came to
this Court complaining about the rejection of his application
under Section 457 Cr.P.C. to return the vehicle. It was then
brought to the notice of the court that proceedings under Section
61A of the Kerala Forest Act have already been initiated. The
petitioner then submitted that he shall apply for interim release of
the vehicle to him before the forest authorities and accordingly
that petition was closed as per order dt.12.8.2008 in Cr.M.C.
2807 of 2008. The petitioner applied for interim release of the
vehicle. It is reported now that even prior to 12.8.08 by order
dt.15.7.2008 the said prayer of the petitioner stood rejected. The
W.P.C.No. 28286 of 2008
2
petitioner has come to this Court now to challenge the said order
invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
2. The learned Govt. Pleader was directed to take instructions.
After taking instructions from the authorised officer he submits that
final orders shall be passed under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act
on or before 17.11.2008 and if final orders cannot be passed by that
date, the vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on condition that he
produces bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle from any
Nationalised bank.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light
of the submissions of the learned Govt. Pleader, no further orders are
necessary in this writ petition.
4. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed accepting the
submissions of the Govt. Pleader.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm