ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the registered owner of a vehicle bearing Reg No.KL-48/J-4729, which was seized by the Sub Inspector of Police, Iritty on 31.05.2021 for allegedly transporting Indian made foreign liquor meant for sale only in the State of Karnataka. Crime No.210/2021 was registered against the person who was transporting the contraband, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 55(a) and 55(i) of the Kerala Abkari Act (for short, the Act). The petitioner has approached Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur by filing CMP No.617 of 2021 under Section 451 Cr.P.C for getting interim custody of the vehicle. The court has passed the impugned order allowing the release of the vehicle infavour of the petitioner on execution of a bond for Rs.2,20,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum and subject to conditions that;

“1. Petitioner shall deposit Rs.2,20,000/- (Two lakh twenty thousand only) as value of the vehicle assessed by the AMVI, Iritty.

2. Petitioner shall produce the said vehicle before the court or any other court or before such authority as the court may direct whenever required to do so.

3. The petitioner shall not transfer or alienate the vehicle by selling it or otherwise dealt with, without the permission of the court.

4. Petitioner shall produce the duly attested photographs and CD of the vehicle taken from it's four angles.

5. Petitioner shall produce the certificate obtained from the photographer in compliance with Sec.65B of Indian Evidence Act.

6. Petitioner shall produce proper and legal documents showing that the petitioner has right to possess the property as registered owner, or otherwise legally acceptable documents will have to be produced by the petitioner before this Court.

7. This order shall be subject to any order of confiscation passed by the authority concerned.

8. Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.”

2. It is submitted by Sri.K.Dilip, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order ought not to have been passed by the Magistrate under Section 451 Cr.P.C. According to him, confiscation proceedings ought to have been initiated in the matter by the authorised officer immediately after seizure of the vehicle and the officer authorised to initiate proceedings is the Assistant Commissioner of Excise. According to him, the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur is devoid of jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 451 Cr.P.C in view of Section 67(B) of the Act, which authorises confiscation of a conveyance used for transportation of contraband. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to an illegality in the order that the valuation of the vehicle was done by the AMVI, Iritty, who is not a competent authority under the Act to do so. According to him, valuation of the vehicle has to be done by the Mechanical Engineer of the Excise Department or any Mechanical Engineer of and above the rank of Assistant Executive Engineer of the State Public Works Department. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the confiscation proceedings under Section 67(B) of the Act is already initiated and therefore, he must be permitted to raise his contentions before the Assistant Commissioner of Excise, who is the officer authorised to conduct the proceedings for confiscation, after setting aside the impugned order.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur is empowered by Section 53(B) of the Act to pass an order for release of the vehicle in interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C.

4. This Court finds from Section 53(B) that any court on finding that the vehicle or other conveyance used for committing any offence under the Act, if seized or detained, it can order for release of the same in interim custody on terms of execution of sufficient bond by way of cash securi