IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2728 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.1685/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -I, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ HARRIS PAUL, S/O POULOSE, HOUSE NO.136, THOMBRA HOUSE, O.M.ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No. 2728 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the owner of a car which has been seized by the police in connection with crime No.73/2008 of Alappuzha North police station. Some persons were allegedly found moving around in that vehicle under suspicious circumstance. The vehicle was seized and produced before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner applied for release of the vehicle. The prayer to release the vehicle was rejected. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is not culpably liable for any offence. The petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle. He had entrusted the vehicle to a workshop owner. From that workshop some persons had come into possession of the vehicle. They were found moving around in the vehicle when the police intercepted the same. In any view of the matter, the petitioner has no contumacious responsibility in respect of the seizure of the vehicle. No proceedings are initiated against him. The petitioner may be granted release of the said vehicle. Crl.M.C.No.2728/08 2 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the police is now satisfied that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle. The State has no objection against release of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner subject to appropriate conditions. The petitioner may be directed to produce the original registration certificate before the learned Magistrate. He may further be directed to file an affidavit as ordered by the learned Magistrate already. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall do the same. 4. I am in these circumstances satisfied that this Crl.M.C. can be allowed. The impugned order can be set aside and the vehicle can be directed to be released to the petitioner. 5. In the result, a) This petitioner is allowed. b) The impugned order is set aside. It is directed that the vehicle - KL-7/J7857 shall be released to the petitioner on the following terms and conditions. Crl.M.C.No.2728/08 3 i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for the value of the vehicle to be fixed provisionally by the learned Magistrate with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. ii) The petitioner shall produce before the learned Magistrate the original of the registration certificate in his name. He shall also within a period of ten days from this date file the affidavit as already directed by the learned Magistrate. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2728/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.2728/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008