IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32706 of 2010(K) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. TOMY CHACKO, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 45 YEARS, KARIAMARAM (KARYAMADATHIL) VEEDU, HOUSE NO.4/190, ALACOODE, KALAYANTHANI P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. GRACY, W/O.GEORGE THOMAS, 52 YEARS, CHERUNILATH HOUSE, MOOLAMATTOM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. JOSEPH, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.ABRAHAM, ANTHICKAL HOUSE, KARIMANNOOR P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020. 2. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, FOREST RANGE OFFICE, PERUVANNAMOOZHY P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN 673528. 3. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE FOREST RANGE OFFICE, MUTTOM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN 671 533. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, QUILANDY POLICE STATION, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE, PIN 673 307. 5. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM-686691. ...2/- 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 TO R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 32706 of 2010 K ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T First petitioner is the registered owner of lorry bearing registration No.KL-38A-3709. The lorry was used for transportation of certain timber from the property belonging to respondents 2 and 3. The fourth respondent seized the lorry and timber on 15-08-2010. Thereupon, crime No.679/2010 was registered alleging offences under the Indian Penal Code and Kerala Forest Act. FIR was filed before the Court concerned. 2. Petitioner sought release of the vehicle, which was declined by the Magistrate. That order was challenged before this Court in WPC.No.27123/2010. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment rendered on 22-09-2010, directing that orders under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act be passed by the Authorised Officer. It was directed that in the event of delay, the claim of the petitioner for interim W.P.(C) No.32706/10 : 2 : custody of the vehicle shall be considered. 3. Petitioner submits that despite the above, the Authorised Officer passed Ext.P3 order dated 28-09-2010, stating that further time is required for passing orders in the matter. It was complaining the delay in passing final orders and also regarding the interim custody of the vehicle, this writ petition is filed. 4. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that after enquiry, crime was registered by the police alleging offences under the IPC and Kerala Forest Act against the petitioners. Subsequently, the vehicle and the materials seized were transferred to the first respondent who registered OR No.16/2010. It is stated that the first respondent accordingly conducted an enquiry and thereupon was convinced that offences made out against the petitioner were for violation of the provisions contained in the KFPT Rules. It is stated that accordingly, fresh FIR has been lodged before the Court concerned. According to the learned Government W.P.(C) No.32706/10 : 3 : Pleader, OR No.16/2010 registered against the petitioner is pending before the Court concerned. 5. I feel that if the petitioners want interim custody of the vehicle pending finalisation of the proceedings that are pending, the remedy of the petitioners is to make an application before the Court, which is seized of the crime. 6. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merits of the contentions raised, I dispose of this writ petition as follows:- It will be open to the petitioners to make appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate, in which event, necessary order in accordance with law will be passed. It is directed that if such an application is filed by the petitioners, orders thereon shall be passed, at any rate, within two weeks thereafter. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks