IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2011 / 4TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23375 of 2011(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ARJUN HERBALS, D/NO.14/64 KANAYAMKODE, KUNNATHARA, QUILANDY,KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, RAMDASAN T BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER VALAYAR, VALAYAR CHECK POST, PALAKKAD 678 624. SR GP SRI.M.H.HANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23375 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 24.7.2007 OF THE PETITIONER EXT.P2- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, RAJAMPET DATED 2.8.2011 EXT.P3- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE INVOICE ISSUED BEARING NO.42/2011 DATED 10.8.2011 EXT.P4- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, RAJAMPET DATED 10.8.11 EXT.P5- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).22234/2011 DATED 16.8.11 EXT.P6- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT/PASS FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 19.8.11 ALONG WITH RELEASING ORDER ISSUED BY COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR AND PERMIT ISSUED BY FOREST DEPARTMENT, ANDRAPRADESH EXT.P7- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN OFFENCE NO.14/2011 FILED BY RESPONDENT BEFORE JFCM COURT I, PALAKKAD DATED 20.8.2011 EXT.P8- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MAHAZER PREPARED BY RESPONDENT FOR THE VEHICLE WITH GOODS DATED 20.8.2011 EXT.P9- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER RECORDED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 20.8.2011 EXT.P10- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OR.14/2011 OF JFCM COURT I PALAKKAD DATED 23.8.2011 (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).23375/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 26th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT According to the petitioner on the strength of Ext.P2, Red Sanders Roots and Chips were transported by them. It is stated that at the Walayar Check post, the vehicle was detained on 11.8.2011, on the allegation that higher rate of tax was payable. Thereupon petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court as W.P. (C).22234/2011 which was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment directing release of the goods and the vehicle, subject to the conditions mentioned in the judgment. 2. Petitioner submits that accordingly, the vehicle and the goods were ordered to be released on 19.8.2011. In the meanwhile the periods specified for transportation expired on 15.8.2011 and on 19.8.2011, for getting a pass for transporting the goods to Kozhikode, petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application to the Forest Range Officer. Petitioner complains that without considering his request, Ext.P7 complaint was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Palakkad, and that the complaint has been registered as O.R.14/2011. Thereupon the petitioner sought W.P.(C).23375/2011 2 release of the vehicle and the goods by filing Ext.P10 application to the JFCM Court. The case now stands posted to 1.9.2011. It is at that stage, this writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the complaint and to release the vehicle along with the goods, with a further prayer to the respondent to pass orders on Ext.P6 application also. 3. As far as the first prayer for quashing Ext.P7 complaint is concerned, in my view, if at all the petitioner seeks quashing of the criminal complaint, the proper remedy available to the petitioner lies under Section 482 Cr.P.C and no extraordinary case has been made out for invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a matter of this nature. Therefore, that prayer has to be declined and I do so. 4. The second prayer is for release of the goods and the vehicle. Now that the criminal case is pending before the Magistrate Court and the petitioner has also filed an application as per Ext.P10, it is for the Magistrate to exercise his powers under Section 452 Cr.P.C., and pass orders on his request. This the learned W.P.(C).23375/2011 3 Magistrate will do as expeditiously as possible, particularly taking note of the long detention of the vehicle and the goods. 5. As far as Ext.P6 application made by the petitioner for getting a pass for transportation of goods, is concerned, the respondent, before whom the same is pending, shall pass orders thereon, within one week of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs