IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 250 of 2008() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP.5740/07 IN OR.42/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: CLAIM PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- BABU M.GEORGE, AGED 42, S/O. GEORGE, MANGALATH HOUSE, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA. BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No.250 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of February, 2008 ORDER The petitioner who claims to be the owner of a 2005 model excavator with Serial No.07031628 seized by the Forest Range Officer, Thaliparamba under Section 52 of the Kerala Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) in O.R.No.42/2007 registered against another person before the J.F.C.M- I, Kannur, sought interim custody of the vehicle by filing Annexure A1 application before the court below. As per Annexure A3 order, dated 8.1.2008, the said petition was dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the concerned Forest Officer under Sec.53 of the Act. 2. The said view of the Magistrate cannot be faulted in the light of the decision in John vs DFO, Kottayam ( 1996(2) KLT 984) and the order dated 21.2.08 in Cr.M.C.No.42/2008 of this Court . Hence, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the concerned Forest Officer under Section 52 of the Kerala Forest Act for interim custody pending finalisation of the contemplated proceedings for confiscation under Sec.61A of the Crl.R.P.No.250 of 2008 2 Act, this petition is dismissed. If and when the petitioner moves the concerned authority under Section 53 of the Forest Act, appropriate orders for interim custody shall be passed, without undue delay. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner today itself.