IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1898 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ CMP NO.3466/2010 IN CMP.2828/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M.ABDUL RAHIMAN, SON OF KADER, MOVVAL(H) PALLIKKARA, HOSDURG. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KUNHAMMED, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KOPPARA KUNHANDU, NEAR KOYA PALLI, ATHINHAL, MANIKOTH POST, ANANUR, HOSDURG, 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, ALONG WITH CRMC NO.1999/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..Nos.1898 & 1999 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24 th day of June, 2010 ORDER The common petitioner who is the father in law of the 1st respondent in Crl.M.C.No.1898/2010 and father of the 1st respondent in Crl.M.C.No.1999/2010, challenges the common order dated 26.8.2009 passed by the J.F.C.M-I, Hosdurg as per which the petitioner's application for interim custody of a motor cycle was dismissed and the application of his daughter on behalf of her husband Kunhamad for interim custody was allowed. 2. According to Khadeeja, the daughter of the petitioner, the Motorcycle in question was gifted by her father to her husband at the time of her marriage on 28.7.2008 and after going back to the Gulf countries where he is employed, he came back to India on 31.10.2008 and again returned to Gulf on 9.12.2008 and the said vehicle was in her husband's house from where, on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 93 Cr.P.C., the vehicle was seized by the Police and produced Crl. M.C. Nos.1898 & 1999 of 2010 2 before the Magistrate. 3. According to the petitioner, in September 2008 his son- in-law Kunhamad came along with the petitioner's daughter and obtained the motorcycle belonging to the petitioner for a temporary use but failed to return the same. The court below has observed that going by the endorsements of the passport of Kunhamad he was not in India in September 2008 and therefore the petitioner's case was demonstrably false. Accordingly the application for interim custody filed by the petitioner's daughter Khadeeja on behalf of her husband was allowed. I do not find any good reason to interfere with the said common order dismissing the petitioner's application and allowing his daughter's application for interim custody of the vehicle. It goes without saying that the order for interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C will be subject to final orders under Section 452 Cr.P.C. These Crl.M.Cs are accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj