IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2010 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1376 of 2004() -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21/04/2004 IN CMP.1081/04 IN CMP.1080/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER / APPELLANT ------------------------------------------------ BASHEER, S/O. MOHAMMED, KALATHUMPADIKKALL HOUSE, ALATHIYOOR, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS / COMPLAINANTS -------------------------------------------------- 1. KUNHUMOIDEENKUTTY S/O. MAMMUNNI, PANTHAPULAKKAL HOUSE, TRIPRANGODE AMSOM, ALATHIYOOR DESOM, TIRUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN.J ------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.NO. 1376 OF 2004 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of March, 2010. O R D E R In Crime No.81/04 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Tirur Police Station, for offence u/S.363 r/w 34 IPC, an autorikshaw bearing NoKL2Q 2720 was seized during the course of investigation. The revision petitioner as well as the first respondent filed petitions u/S.451 Code of Criminal Procedure. The petition filed by the revision petitioner was numbered as C.M.P.No.1081/04. The petition filed by the first respondent was numbered as C.M.P.No.1080/04. By the impugned common order dated 21.4.04, the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Tirur before whom the case is pending ordered to release the vehicle to the first respondent. Assailing that order this revision petition was filed. 2. The trial of the case, it is submitted is at the fag end. For the last 6 years the respondent had been possessing the vehicle under the order impugned. Though the revision petitioner claimed title over the vehicle, no document was produced. In the above circumstance, I find that no interference is required at this stage. A Crl.R.P.NO. 1376 OF 2004 2 direction to the learned Magistrate to dispose the vehicle at the final stage, on merits would meet the ends of justice. In the result, this revision petition is disposed of with direction to the learned Magistrate to dispose the vehicle u/S.452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on merits untrammeled by the observations in the order impugned. P.S.GOPINATHAN,JUDGE. pm