Authorities must follow due procedures during vehicle seizures, ensuring compliance with legal reporting requirements to maintain accountability.

J U D G M E N T

The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the fourth respondent to place a report regarding seizure of the petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No.KL 01 D 140 Tipper Lorry before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mavelikkara.

2. The facts of the case show that the vehicle was seized alleging illegal transportation of river sand on 09/05/2012. The petitioner disputes the same. It is also stated that no Mahazar was prepared by the third respondent or his subordinate at the time of seizure. It is averred in para.4 of the writ petition that the petitioner's vehicle was handed over by the third respondent-Tahsildar to the fourth respondent-Sub Inspector of Police, and it is now in the possession of the fourth respondent. The petitioner relies upon Sujith v. State of Keral and others [ 2012 (2) KLT 547 ] wherein, in the last paragraph, the Division Bench has issued the following directions:

“It is hereby ordered that the revenue and police authorities, while effecting seizure, shall ensure that any revenue official effecting the seizure, notifies such W.P.(C). No.11489/2012 seizure, also to a police official, over and above the requirement in S.22 of the Act and the Rules. That police official may effect seizure of those goods and report such seizure to the jurisdictional Magistrate in accordance with law and any police officer effecting seizure shall, apart from reporting any such seizure to the jurisdictional Magistrate, also place a report of such seizure before the concerned revenue authority so that action can follow through the criminal court and through the revenue authority in terms of the laws. Following the aforesaid, it is further ordered that in all pending cases, the competent police officer shall effect seizure and report the same to the jurisdictional magistrate, if not already done and the competent revenue authority shall make appropriate complaint to the jurisdictional Magistrate at the earliest. This would also enable the owners of the goods or vehicles to apply for interim custody in terms of S.451 or 457 Cr.P.C., as the case may be. In ordering release, the Judicial Magistrate shall be guided by the terms laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan v. State of Kerala (2010 (3) KLT 413 (FB). The appropriate authorities shall also file complaints for initiating prosecution in all cases, where offences under the Act are disclosed. These directions shall apply in dealing with sand and vehicles, seized by the police or revenue authority under the provisions of the Act or the Code of W.P.(C). No.11489/2012 Criminal Procedure, over and above the directions in Moosakoya (2008 (1) KLT 538) and Shoukathali (2009 (1) KLT 640), until appropriate legislative provisions are brought in.”

In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the fourth respondent to file a report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mavelikkara, in terms of the directions issued by the Division Bench in Sujith's case (supra), expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one week from today for enabling the petitioner for seeking appropriate remedies. The petitioner will forward a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of this Judgment to the fourth respondent for compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.