IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22057 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.I. PAUL, S/O. ITTIRA, CHERPANATH HOUSE, VETTILAPARA. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, KERALA 3. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, PARIAM RANGE. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.PAULOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 22057 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the accused in O.R.No.10 of 2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakudy. He was an Assistant Sub Inspector. He claims to have purchased rosewood trees from one Mr.K.T. Joseph under the sale agreement dated 25-8-2007. The said trees along with certain others were seized by the forest officials. The allegation is that the petitioner has no authority to store rosewood trees. In so far as teakwood is concerned, though he was issued a pass, the quantity retained by him is not the permissible quantity. The petitioner approached the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakudy for release of the timber. This was dismissed, as per Ext.P5 holding that the timber had not been produced as “thondi” before the Magistrate by the forest officials. The petitioner was given an opportunity to approach the forest officials. 2. Petitioner approached this Court for a direction to release the timber. This Court had directed the respondents to complete the adjudication, pursuant to the seizure, which is the subject matter of Annexure A2(a) mahazar, within a time limit. The time has been extended W.P.(C) No. 22057/09 2 to 1-12-2009. Petitioner prays for release of the timber, pending such investigation. 3. This Court had already considered the petitioner’s case for release of the timber vide Ext.P4 judgment. There is a time frame fixed to complete the investigation. This has to be adhered to. On completion of the investigation, the articles shall be produced before the Magistrate who shall deal with an application, if any, filed by the petitioner under section 457 Code of Criminal Procedure. If the investigation is not completed within the time granted or extended by this Court, then the petitioner’s application for release of timbers seized from him shall be considered and orders passed for release, subject to such conditions as are found appropriate. The petition is disposed of as above. V. GIRI, JUDGE. mn.