IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3368 of 2011() --------------------------------------- (OR.NO.18/2011 OF CHITTAR FOREST STATION) .... PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED/R.C OWNER: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ANILKUMAR @ SHANKER,S/O.RAJAN, CHARIVUPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE, CHITTAR,SEETHATHODE VILLAGE,RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. BINDU ANIL, CHARIVUPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE,CHITTAR, SEETHATHODE VILLAGE,RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS; ------------------------------------------------------ 1. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE FOREST DEPUTY RANGER, CHITTAR FOREST STATION. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss CRMC.NO.3368/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1. TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.1 AND THE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN O.R 1/11 OF KOCHUKOIKKAL FOREST STATION. ANNEXURE 2. TRUE COPY OF THE VEHICLE PARTICULARS OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. ANNEXURE 3. TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE GOVT.NO.14920/B1/2008 FOREST DATED 2/1/2010. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3368 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November 2011 O R D E R First Petitioner, who is the 2nd accused in O.R.No.18/2011 of Chittar Forest Station who claims to be the owner of the vehicle bearing No.KL-6C-7977 has filed this petition to quash further proceedings against him in that crime. Inter alia a relief is also sought for getting release of that vehicle. 2. The substance of the allegation is that, the first petitioner caused a teak tree to be cut from his own property against the provisions of the Preservation of Trees Act. The learned counsel submits that no offence under the Kerala Forest Act is involved and as such the question of confiscation of the vehicle does not arise. I find force in that submission. Hence, if the vehicle has been produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, the same shall be Crl.M.C. No.3368 of 2011 -: 2 :- released to second petitioner on production of the document showing the ownership of the vehicle and on her executing a bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakshs only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount, in proof of which, one of them shall be directed to produce attested photocopy of the title deed of the property. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt