IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21807 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ BUSHARA HARIS, W/O.HARIS, PALLITHEKKEDHIL HOUSE, VANIYAMPARA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR. H.BADARUDDIN MRS. AYSHA RAHMAN MRS. B.SHAMEERA MRS. M.ARCHANA MRS. M.SHAZIA SULTHANA RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HIGHWAY PARTOL TEAM MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.21807 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 4th August,2009 J U D G M E N T Vehicle belonging to the petitioner bearing Reg. No.KL-4-U 9736 was seized on 8.7.2009 for the alleged illicit transportation of river sand. Pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, the District Collector considered the question of interim custody and directed interim custody of the vehicle subject to certain conditions, as evidenced by, Ext.P8 order. Ext. P8 has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. Heard learned Government Pleader also. 3. Most of the conditions in Ext.P8 are in consonance with the directions issued in Subramanian Vs. State of Kerala [2009 (1) KLT 77). But the directions issued therein to provide two solvent sureties apart from remitting an amount of Rs.1 lakh does not seem to be warranted. So also the direction to the ower of the vehicle to produce the vehicle before the Sub Inspector once in a week is also unwarranted, since there is already an W.P ( C) No.21807 of 2009 2 interdiction against the alienation of the vehicle. Thus, if the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.1 lakh being a portion of the value of the vehicle and complies with the other conditions (except condition No.4 and the production of two solvent sureties) contained in Ext.P8, it shall be treated as due compliance and vehicle shall be released to the petitioner as already directed in Ext.P8 subject to final orders to be passed by the District Collector. The deposit of amount by the petitioner for the purpose of complying with Ext.P8 and the direction now issued by this Court will obviously be subject to final orders to be passed by the District Collector. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.21807 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No.21807 of 2009 4