IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4737 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 664/2007 OF CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER: --------------- JOHNSON GEORGE, AGED 40 S/O. GEORGE, MALITHPPU VEEDU, SAKTHIKULANGARA MURI, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SHIBU GEORGE (KOLLAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME DETACHMENT KOLLAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4737 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner herein claims to be the owner of a trawler. He has received notice from the Investigating Officer in crime No.664 of 2007 of Chavara police station to produce the said trawler before the Investigating Officer. The petitioner has rushed to this Court with the plea that he will not be in a position to produce the trawler before the Investigating Officer at his office as it would be physically impossible for him to produce such trawler before the Investigating Officer at his office. The petitioner has a further contention that the trawler is not in any way connected with the crime in question and that the seizure of the trawler is not in any way necessary for a proper conduct of the investigation in crime No.664 of 2007. 2. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor, who opposes the application. The learned Prosecutor submits that the notice issued does not at all oblige the petitioner to take the Crl.M.C.No. 4737 of 2008 2 trawler out of water and produce it before the Investigating Officer. The terms of the order communicated to the petitioner, if reasonably and realistically understood, only directs the petitioner to make the trawler and its documents available for the perusal of the Investigating Officer. He can inform the Investigating Officer at what time and where the trawler can be made available so that the Investigating Officer can verify the records and take appropriate further action. 3. The learned Prosecutor further submits that it is incorrect to say that the trawler is not in any way connected with the investigation in Crime No.664 of 2007. According to the learned Prosecutor, the allegation in that crime is that the four accused persons acting in collusion had defrauded the defacto complainants, an old couple, with whom the first accused was living as a maid servant. It is the case of the prosecution now that the trawler was purchased making use of the amounts fraudulently taken away from the defacto complainants. In these circumstances, for a proper investigation to be conducted, the documents in respect of the trawler will have to be verified and appropriate decision will have to be taken. Appropriate follow up Crl.M.C.No. 4737 of 2008 3 action also will have to be taken. In these circumstances the learned Prosecutor opposes the prayer made in this petition. 4. I have considered all the relevant circumstances. I am satisfied that this petition can be allowed in part and the Investigating Officer can be directed to issue a specific direction afresh to the petitioner as to where, when and at what time the trawler along with the documents must be made available for the perusal/examination of the Investigating Officer. When such a request is received, the petitioner shall comply with the same and make the trawler/relevant documents available for the perusal of the Investigating Officer. 5. This Crl.M.C. is allowed to the above extent. 6. Hand over the order to the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Prosecutor. (R. BASANT) Judge tm