IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 31ST BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27123 of 2010(Q) ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.679/2010 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION. ...................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. TOMY CHACKO, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 45 YEARS, KARYAMARAM HOUSE, H.NO.4/190, ALAKKODU, KALAYANTHANI PO, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. GRACY, W/O.GEORGE THOMAS, AGED 52 YEARS, CHERUNILATH, ARAKALA, MOOLAMATTAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. JOSEPH, S/O.ABRAHAM, AGED 53 YEARS, ATHICKAL KARIMANNOR,THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THOMAS, SRI.NAVEEN THOMAS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, COCHIN-31. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, PIN- 673 481. 3. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN- 673 580. 4. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, THODUPUZHA, PIN- 685 584. 5. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, KANNUR, PIN- 678 702. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.27123 of 2010 Q -------------------------- JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 3 to 5 to release the vehicle and the wood seized by considering Exhibit P8 application filed by the petitioners before the Divisional Forest Officer, Kozhikode contending that the wood was transported under due authorisation and therefore, it cannot be seized. 2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned special Government Pleader were heard. 3. Learned Special Government Pleader submitted that after the seizure of the vehicle and the wood, they were entrusted with the Forest Department and the question whether they are to be confiscated or not is to be taken on collecting relevant materials and appropriate orders will be passed on Exhibit P8 without delay. WPC 27123/10 2 4. When Exhibit P8 application was filed before the third respondent, it is for the third respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, without undue delay. If third respondent requires time for disposing Exhibit P8, petitioner could claim interim custody and if raised, it is to be considered by the third respondent and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law. Petition is disposed. 22nd September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv