Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 29158
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
RAJENDRAN K.R – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC 7276 2023
ARJUN S. R.
The court reinforced that seized vehicles can be returned under Section 451 with necessary conditions to protect both the owner’s livelihood and public safety.
Headnote:
Vehicle - Criminal Procedure - Cr.P.C Section 451 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 451 of the Cr.P.C and the interpretations from Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, emphasizing the need for judicial balance in granting interim custody of the seized vehicle while recognizing serious allegations against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of a tanker lorry, had his vehicle seized for allegedly disposing of septic waste illegally. A petition for interim custody was filed but dismissed by the Magistrate citing serious allegations and previously issued court orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations yet found merit in releasing the vehicle under strict conditions, affirming the need for expedient and judicious exercise of power under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C.
Issues: Whether the vehicle can be returned to the petitioner under the provisions of Section 451 of the Cr.P.C given the serious allegations against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The Magistrate has the authority to release seized property under Section 451, considering the seriousness of the offense and the necessity of safeguarding the petitioner's livelihood, subject to stringent conditions.
Final Decision: The vehicle shall be released with strict conditions imposed.
ORDER
The above Crl.M.C is filed challenging the order dated
11.07.2023 in CMP No.1615 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kalamaserry arising from Crime No.943 of
2023 of Eloor Police Station.
2. The above case is registered alleging that the petitioner, who is the owner of Mahindra Navistar Lord King Pride Tanker Lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-56/C-5781, transported and disposed septic waste within the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent on early hours of 09.07.2023. The vehicle was seized by the police in connection with the above crime. A petition was filed for interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C and the same was dismissed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he committed the offences under Section 269 of the Indian Penal Code and 120(e) of Kerala Police Act . The vehicle was taken into custody when it was found illegally disposing waste in a public place.
5. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition filed under Section 451 of the Code mainly for the reason that the allegation against the petitioner is very serious and the learned Magistrate also observed that considering the spirit of the order of this Court dated 25.05.2023 in W.P.(C). No.7844/2023, the petitioner is not entitled interim custody. I think there is some force in the above finding of the learned Magistrate.
6. But, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the vehicle is the livelihood of the petitioner and he is ready to comply any conditions imposed by this Court. It is also submitted that the vehicle is now parked in an open place and if it is continued to be there, it will be damaged. The Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and supported the order passed by the learned Magistrate.
7. After hearing both sides, I think the vehicle can be released after imposing stringent conditions. InSunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat ( AIR 2003 SC 638 ), the Apex Court held that powers under Section 451 should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously after imposing appropriate conditions. I am of the considered opinion that the Magistrate can be directed to release the vehicle, after imposing the conditions mentioned inSunderbhai Ambalal Desai’s case (supra).
Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of in the following manner:
1. Annexure-B order is set aside.
2. The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kalamassery is directed to release the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-56/C-5781, after imposing the conditions mentioned in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v.
State of Gujarat ( AIR 2003 SC 638 ).
3. The petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle without the permission of the Court.
4. The petitioner shall not commit similar offence in future and if such offence is committed, the Police Authorities are free to approach the lower court and the lower court can pass appropriate orders to repossess the vehicle even though this order is passed by this Court.
