ORDER

Dated this the 07th day of March, 2022 This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C’) challenging an order passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Perumbavoor (for short ‘the court below’) under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. in CMP No.1178/2021.

2. The petitioner is the registered owner of a Goods Lorry of Mahindra Navistar Automotive Ltd, bearing registration No.-KL-02-BG-7477 (Eng.No.BA112K0142, Chassis No. MA1PFAHBCB6K91776) and it was seized by the respondent in OR No.06/2021 of Mekkappala Forest Station. The drivers of the above vehicle employed by the petitioner were arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in the above crime. The vehicle was purchased by the petitioner on 10.08.2021 as per sale agreement and he has no involvement in the above crime. Accordingly, an application was moved by him under Section 451 Cr.P.C seeking for a temporary release of the vehicle in his custody. The court below has passed an order on 13.10.2021 directing release of the vehicle subject to twelve conditions, the first among which reads:-

“Petitioner shall either deposit cash security of Rs.6,24,000/- (Rupees Six lakh and twenty four thousand only) before the court or produce bank guarantee for Rs.6,24,000/- (Rupees Six lakh and twenty four thousand only) being the value of the vehicle.”

Vide condition No.2 of the impugned order, the petitioner was also directed to execute a bond for Rs.6,24,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum. Condition No.2 imposed as above being one coming within the purview of Section 53 of the Act, that alone is sufficient to serve the purpose.

3. Section 53 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) is apposite reference and therefore, is extracted hereunder:

“53. Power to release property seized under section 52.- Any Forest Officer of a rank not inferior to that of a Ranger, who or whose subordinate has seized any tools, boats, vehicles or cattle under the provisions of Section 52, may release the same on the execution by the owner thereof a bond for the production of the property so released, if and when so required before the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure has been made.”

(Emphasis supplied)

4. Under Section 53 of the Act, any Forest Officer of a rank not inferior to that of a Ranger, when seized of any tools, boats, vehicles or cattle under the provisions of Section 52, shall release it on execution by it’s owner o f a bond for the production of the property so released, if and when so required, before the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence. Therefore, a Forest Official is empowered under the above provision of the Act to release the vehicle in interim custody of the owner on condition of himself executing a bond for production of the property before the court as and when directed by it. In the case on hand, the value of the vehicle was obtained through assessment by an expert as Rs.6,24,000/-. Furnishing of cash security being not the requirement of the court acting within the purview of the Act, by imposing condition No.1 while ordering interim custody of the vehicle, the court has gone wrong. The above provision of the Act directs only execution of a bond for the value of the vehicle. Therefore, condition No.1 imposed on an erroneous understanding of the direction of the provision extracted above is liable to be set aside.

In the above circumstances, Crl.M.C is allowed and condition No.1 in the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner shall abide by all other conditions imposed on him without failure to get the vehicle released in his interim custody.

Sd/-

MARY JOSEPH JUDGE

NAB

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6070/2021 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE OCCURRENCE REPORT IN OR NO.6/2021 OF MEKKAPPALA FOREST STATION DATED 16.8.2021.

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JFCM-III PERUMBAVOOR IN CMP N