The petitioner herein is the holder of an explosive licence. While

certain explosives, crackers etc. were being transported to his shops at

Kannur and Kasaragod, the vehicle was intercepted and about

1091.8 gms of explosives were seized. Crime No.487 of 2019 was

consequently registered arraying the driver of the vehicle as an

accused inter alia under Section 286 of the IPC, 118(f) of the KP Act

and Section 9B(1)(b) of Explosives Act.

2.

The petitioner approached the learned Magistrate and filed

an application seeking interim custody of the explosives which were

seized. He contended that he was having a valid licence. He produced

documents to show that the licence issued to him by the Chief

Controller of Explosives on 18.3.2015 was valid till 31.3.2017 and that

prior to the expiry of the licence, i.e., on 13.2.2017, he had filed an

application seeking renewal of the licence for the period from 1.4.2017

till 31.3.2020. He urged that in view of Rule 112(4) and (5) of the

Explosives Rules, he had a deemed licence as his application for

renewal was pending consideration of the authority. The learned

Magistrate, however, rejected the application holding that the

petitioner was not having a valid licence on the date of seizure.

3

3.

Heard Sri.George Mecheril, the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also gone

through the materials made available.

4.

Section 112 (4) & 5 of the Explosives Rules, 2008 is

relevant, which reads as follows:

(4) Every application for the renewal of a licence

shall be made so as to reach the licensing

authority or the authority empowered to renew

the licence on or before the date on which the

licence expires.

(5) If the application for renewal reaches the

renewing or licensing authority on or before the

date of expiry, the licence shall be deemed to be

in force until such date as the licensing authority

renews the licence or until an intimation that the

renewal of the licence is refused has been

communicated to the applicant.

5.

In other words, renewal application will have to be made

before the empowered authority before the date on which the licence

expires and on such submission, the licence shall be deemed to be in

force until the licencing authority renews the licence or the order of

refusal is communicated to the licensee.

6.

In the case on hand, Ext.P1 would show that the licence

was due to expire on 31.12.2017. Ext.P2 reveals that prior to the

4

expiry of the licence and in accordance with Rule 112 the petitioner

had applied for renewal of licence. Ext.P3 is the copy of the

communication issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives

informing him that his application for renewal was being considered.

It also appear from Ext.P7 that the licence was renewed on 7.5.2019

and the same is valid till 31.3.2020. In that view of the matter, as on

14.4.2017, on which day, the seizure was effected, the petitioner was

having a deemed licence.

7.

In that view of the matter, the learned Magistrate was not

justified in dismissing the application. The impugned order will stand

set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to release the explosives

and crackers seized from the possession of the petitioner by imposing

reasonable conditions.

This petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

Ps/30/5/19

JUDGE

//True copy//

PS to Judge

5

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1

TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.

E/SC/KL/SH/6(E59376) ISSUED ON 30-01-2012

EXHIBIT P2

TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF

EXHIBIT P1 TILL 31-03-2020 BEFORE THE

DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLERE OF EXPLOSIVES,

EERNAKULAM AFTER REMITTING REQUIRED RENEWAL

FEE

EXHIBIT P3

TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 08-04-2019

OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVE

ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4

TRUE COPY OF PETITION CMP NO. 1807/2019 IN

CRIME NUMBER 486/19 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL

FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-1 UNDER SECTION 451

OF CRPC. FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT