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

2021 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57842

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
XAVIER.Y – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.Rev.Pet 693/2020



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943 CRL.REV.PET NO. 693 OF 2020 CRIME NO.2598/2020 OF Kundara Police Station, Kollam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 1570/2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, KOLLAM REVISION PETITIONER:

XAVIER.Y AGED 58 YEARS S/O T D YONA, RESIDING AT LEELAYAM, PERUMPUZHA, ELAMPALLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

BY ADV S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)

RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

BY ADV.

SR PP SMT.T.V.NEEMA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

03.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against an order dated

11.11.2020 passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kollam in CMP No.1570/2020 in Crime No.2598 of 2020 of Kundara Police Station. The revision petitioner has filed an application before the Court under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C') seeking for getting the vehicle released in interim custody.

2. The Assistant Public Prosecutor has filed a report before the Court stating that confiscation proceedings under Section 67(B) of the Abkari Act is initiated and therefore interim custody of the vehicle cannot be given to the petitioner. Thereupon, the petition was dismissed by the court and the prayer of the petitioner for getting the vehicle in interim custody was declined.

3. The confiscation proceedings under Section 67(B) of the Act is stated to have been commenced. Petitioner being the registered owner of the vehicle and not an accused has the right to be heard in the matter of getting custody of the vehicle in his favour, prior to initiation of confiscation proceedings. Therefore, the Commissioner shall issue notice to him and he must be granted with reasonable opportunity of being heard prior to passing of orders of confiscation.

Crl.R.P stands disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/-

MARY JOSEPH JUDGE ska APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 693/2020 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE ANNEXURE-A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK REGISTRATION BEARING NO.KL-02-BG-9726.

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