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. 21970 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ UNNIKRISHNAN.E.R., S/O.RAMAN, AGED 43 YEARS, ERUMATHURUTHY, KOOLIMUTTOM P.O., KOOLIMUTTOM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR. P.M.BENZIR RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION, MATHILAKOM, 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: kkms/ V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 21970 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-10-V-4366 was seized on 8.5.2009 for the alleged illicit transportation of river sand. Pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in Ext.P3 judgment, the District Collector considered the question of interim custody and directed that interim custody of the vehicle be given subject to certain conditions, as evidenced by, Ext.P5 order. Ext. P5 has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. Heard learned Government Pleader also. 3. Most of the conditions in Ext.P5 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. 21970 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.P5, it shall be treated as due compliance and vehicle shall be released to the petitioner as already directed in Ext.P5 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.P5 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. 21970 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 21970 of 2009 4