IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 / 26TH MAGHA, 1929 Crl.MC.No. 4115 of 2005 ------------------------------ (CMP.2389/2005 in Crime No.664/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, CHANGANACHERRY) .................... PETITIONER: ---------------- PRATHIPAL M.P., PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKENADA, CHENGANNOOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR .T.R., THONDITHALA HOUSE, AZHIYIDATHUCHIRA, THIRUVALLA, PRESIDENT, UTHRAMEL BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE NADUVELICHIRA, AZHIYIDATHUCHIRA. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU R2 BY ADV, SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2008, ALONG WITH CRMC NO. 4117 OF 2005 CRMC NO. 4119 OF 2005 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of February, 2008 O R D E R These three Crl.M.Cs. are arising out of three different crimes viz., Crime Nos.664 of 2005, 663 of 2005 (both are registered in the Changanacherry Police Station) and 467 of 2004 of Chingavanam Police Station. In all these cases, the petitioner is one and the same. The challenge in the above three cases are against the common order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Changanacherry under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by which the properties in question are given as an interim arrangement to the custody of the second respondent in all the cases. 2. Crl.M.C.Nos.4115, 4117 and 4119 of 2005 are preferred against the common order passed in C.M.P.Nos.2389 of 2005 in Crime No.664 of 2005, 2386 of 2005 in Crime No.663 of 2005 and 2388 of 2005 in Crime No.467 of 2004 of the J.F.C.M., Changanacherry. When the three Crl.M.Cs came up for consideration today, since Crl.M.C.Nos. 4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 :-2-: the order impugned and the petitioner are one and the same, it is heard together and being disposed of by a common order. 3. When the above matter was taken up for hearing today, both the counsel for the petitioner as well as the second respondent in these cases submitted that after investigation of the above crimes, the investigating agency has already filed a final report on the basis of which the court took cognizance and thereafter, started the trial, which is now likely to be concluded within a short time. If that be so, I am of the view that this Court need not go into the merits of the claim and the counter claim raised in the Crl.M.Cs. and the correctness of the order passed by the court below before the conclusion of trial. 4. Under Section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which contained in Chapter XXXIV and deals with disposal of property, it is the duty of the trial court to dispose of the property at conclusion of trial. Going by the provisions contained in Section 452 of the Crl.M.C.Nos. 4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 :-3-: Cr.P.C., it is crystal clear that power is given to the trial court so as to find out the real claimants of the properties in question and to take a decision upon the claims advanced by the rival claimants, if any. The impugned order was passed by the court below only as an interim measure and it cannot be treated as a final decision on the rival claims of the parties and the right can be fixed only under Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. on the basis of the available materials and evidence on record. The aggrieved party can also challenge such order in appeal as provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure. In such a situation, it is unwarranted to exercise the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. If that be so, it is only just and proper to dispose of the Crl.M.Cs. with a direction to the trial court to pass appropriate orders under Section 452 of the Cr.P.C. with respect to the disposal of properties in the above cases. As per the impugned order, the interim custody of the properties is given to the petitioners Crl.M.C.Nos. 4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 :-4-: therein (second respondent herein) subject to certain conditions mentioned therein and those arrangements will continue till the final disposal of the matter. 5. It is not necessary to say that the parties will be at liberty to raise their respective contentions before the court below, which will be considered by the court below on merits and the same will be disposed of in accordance with law. The Crl.M.Cs. are disposed of with the above direction and observations. V.K.Mohanan, Judge Mbs/ Crl.M.C.Nos. 4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 :-5-: V.K.MOHANAN, J. -------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.NO. OF 200 -------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Crl.M.C.Nos. 4115, 4117 & 4119 of 2005 :-6-: DATED: -2-2008