IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2009 / 22ND POUSHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 14 of 2009() ---------------------------- CMP.4667/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------ BIJU S/O.GANGADHARAN, PACHILAMAKKAN HOUSE, POOVARAMTHODE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P.NO.14 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 12th January 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the petitioner in C.M.P.4667/2008 filed under Section 457 of Criminal Procedure Code for interim custody of lorry KL-57-A- 2439 which was seized for illegal transportation of river sand on 1/12/2008. Learned Magistrate as per order dated 29/12/2008 dismissed the application holding that District Collector is not made a party to the petition and as held by this court in Abdul Gafoor v. State of Kerala and others (WP(C) No.29980/2008 District Collector has authority to confiscate the vehicle and vehicle is in the custody of District Collector and therefore interim custody cannot be granted under Section 457 of Criminal Procedure Code. The order is challenged in this revision. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that as held by this court in Ahammedkutty v. State of Kerala (2008 CRRP 14/09 2 (1) KLT 1068) so long as a final order was not passed by the District Collector, Magistrate can grant interim custody of the vehicle under Section 457 of Criminal Procedure Code, even if the factum of seizure was not reported to the Magistrate and vehicle was not produced before the Magistrate. True, as held by the Division Bench of this court, District Collector is entitled to proceed with the proceedings initiated under Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. But that does not mean that Magistrate is not competent to grant interim custody of the vehicle under Section 457 of the Code. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that vehicle was not involved in similar offence earlier. It is also not disputed that petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle. In such circumstances, interim custody could be granted on sufficient conditions. 2. Order passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kunnamangalam in C.M.P.4667/2008 is set aside. The Magistrate is directed to grant interim custody of the vehicle to the revision petitioner on deposit of Rs.30,000/- and on executing a bond with two solvent sureties undertaking not to transfer the CRRP 14/09 3 vehicle and not to transport river sand illegally and to produce the vehicle before the District Collector as and when directed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.