SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 4739

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
N. NAGARESH, J
AMEER P.A – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) 1094/2023



Advocates:
K.I.SAGEER MUHAMMED YASIL, SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The court affirmed that ongoing criminal proceedings necessitate seeking vehicle custody through the relevant magistrate rather than direct intervention in a writ.

Headnote:

Seizure - Vehicle - Section 379 IPC, Sections 20 and 21 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act - The court emphasized the proper legal recourse for vehicle custody through the jurisdictional magistrate during pending criminal proceedings.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, claiming ownership of a vehicle seized for alleged illegal sand transportation, argues the vehicle was wrongfully implicated by police, seeking its return.

Finding of the Court:

The court ruled that since the matter is sub judice before a magistrate, the petitioner should pursue the vehicle's release through the appropriate legal channel, allowing the lower court to evaluate the request.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to the return of the seized vehicle prior to the conclusion of ongoing criminal proceedings against him.

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained that it would be inappropriate to intervene in the ongoing case and directed the petitioner to seek relief from the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

Final Decision: Writ petition disposed; liberty granted to approach the magistrate for vehicle release.

J U D G M E N T

------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of January, 2023 The petitioner states that he is the owner of a Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.KL-23D-5035. The petitioner's vehicle was seized by the 2nd respondent-Station House Officer alleging that on 04.09.2021 the vehicle was found transporting two sacks of river sand. It was also alleged that the petitioner has committed offence punishable under Section 379 IPC read with Sections 20 and 21 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act .

2. The petitioner states that the petitioner's vehicle was not involved in any offence whatsoever. The two sacks of river sand were placed by the Police to frame the petitioner, alleges the petitioner. Since the vehicle was seized by the Station House Officer and since it now stands exposed to sun and rain, the petitioner will be put to financial loss as the vehicle is getting damaged day by day. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 02.01.2023 seeking to release the vehicle, which was of no avail. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to direct the 3rd respondent to release the vehicle to the petitioner.

3. Senior Government Pleader entered appearance and submitted that an FIR has been registered. A complaint has already been lodged with regard to the offence. It is evident from Ext.P3 judgment that the case is now pending as C.C No.552/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Hosdurg. In such circumstances, the prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be allowed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the respondents.

5. The petitioner's vehicle has been seized as early on 04.09.2021 alleging that it has been involved in an offence punishable under Section 379 IPC read with Sections 20 and 21 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act . It is discernible from the pleadings that an FIR has been registered and the case is pending as C.C. No.552/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Hosdurg. As the case is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, it will be only proper that the petitioner approaches the Jurisdictional Court to get custody of the vehicle invoking the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court for release / custody of his vehicle. The petitioner submits that he is willing to make an application within a period of one week. If the petitioner makes such application, this Court is sure that the Jurisdictional Magistrate will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law expeditiously.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top