IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 411 of 2008() ------------------------ CMP.14/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MALAPPURAM .................... PETITIONER: ----------------- PALAMPADIYAN MOHAMMED S/O UMMER, PALAMPADIYAN HOUSE, PAZHAMALLUR, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION- THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C. No. 411 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated: 28-1-2008 ORDER Petitioner who is the owner of a vehicle bearing Reg. No. KL-9A 1252, seeks interim custody of the same. The vehicle was seized by the respondent on 30.12.2007 alleging that sand was illegally transported in the vehicle in contravention of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks & Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 “the Act” for short). The petitioner approached the J.F.C.M Malappuram for interim custody of the vehicle but his application for interim custody was returned by the Magistrate holding that since the vehicle was not produced before Court and no report was forwarded under Sec. 102 (3) Cr.P.C. by any police officer, the application for interim custody filed under Sec. 457 Cr.P.C. was not maintainable. Hence this Petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. 2. Even in cases where the seized vehicle is not produced before the Magistrate nor is the seizure reported to the Magistrate, the application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. by the person aggrieved can be treated as a report of seizure. In as much as this Court has granted interim custody of vehicles seized under the provisions of the said Act, I see no reason why this vehicle also should not be released on interim custody, particularly in the light of the decision reported in Crl.M.C. No. 411 of 2008 -:2:- AIR 2003 SC 638 - Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujrat. Accordingly, the vehicle in question shall be released to the petitioner on interim custody on his depositing either a cash security of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) or furnishing bank guarantee for the said amount on and his executing a bond for Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the J.F.C.M, Malappuram without insisting on solvency certificate and subject to the following conditions. i) The petitioner shall keep the vehicle in the same condition in which it has been released to the petitioner. ii) The petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle and its accessories wholly or in part to any person. iii) The petitioner shall not permit the vehicle bearing Reg. No. KL-9A 1252, to be used for any illicit purpose iv) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle before court as and when required by the Magistrate. This order shall be subject to any order for confiscation to be passed under the provisions of the Act. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) sj Crl.M.C. No. 411 of 2008 -:3:-