IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 431 of 2009() ------------------------ CRMP.10982/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, PUNALUR CRIME NO.751/08 OF THE PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- UDAYAKUMAR.A., S/O.ACHUTHAN, MUKULAMPURATHVEEDU, MANJALOOR, PATHANAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTING S.I.OF POLICE, PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 431 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2009 ORDER A vehicle belonging to the petitioner which was allegedly involved in the commission of an offence under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and seized by the police was ordered to be released to the petitioner subject to conditions. The vehicle has not been released to the petitioner so far. It has been directed that the sureties shall produce their title deed “for showing value of their property”. The petitioner has not executed the bond and taken release of the vehicle. But he has instead chosen to come before this Court for a direction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. What is the direction that the petitioner seeks? According to the petitioner, the learned Magistrate may, consistent with the practice available in that Crl.M.C. No. 431 of 2009 -: 2 :- court, direct that the title deeds produced must be retained in court. If such a direction is issued, it will not be justified and therefore a direction may be issued in advance under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. I find that this petition is totally misconceived. The petitioner must produce the title deeds “for showing value of their property”. If the title deeds are not returned, specific application to that effect can be made. Such application must be disposed of on merits by the learned Magistrate. If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the order passed, the petitioner can, of course, challenge that order before the appropriate court. I find no merit whatsoever in this Crl.M.C. seeking advance directions anticipating that the title deeds may not be returned by the learned Magistrate. 2. This Crl.M.C. is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No. 431 of 2009 -: 3 :-