IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2846 of 2009 ---------------------------------- [CMP.NO.6874/2008 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR] .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- PRABEESH, S/O.VELAYIKUTTY, MOOPPIL HOUSE, PURATHOOR AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. MR.JAMSHEED HAFIZ. RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 2846 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 17th September 2009 O R D E R Mini lorry No.KL-8G/1888 was seized by Sub Inspector of police, Tirur on 6/11/2008 and crime No.1251/2008 under Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 was registered. Petitioner claiming to be the owner under an agreement for sale, filed C.M.P.6874/2008 under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure for interim custody of the vehicle. By order dated 25/11/2008 petition was dismissed. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that police is not competent to seize mini lorry under the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Relying on the decision of this court in Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (2009 (3) KLT CRMC 2846/09 2 459) learned counsel argued that police is not entitled to seize mini lorry and in such circumstances, learned Magistrate was not justified in refusing to grant interim custody of the vehicle. Learned Public Prosecutor made available case diary and submitted that case is not registered under Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 as claimed by the petitioner or stated in the order passed by the learned Magistrate and under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act vehicle is liable to be confiscated and in such circumstances, petition can only be dismissed. 4. Case diary establish that case was not registered under the provisions of Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act but under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act which provides for confiscation. The case diary under available substantiate the same. Order passed by the learned Magistrate shows that the very same vehicle was seized in crime No.488/2008 for illegally transporting sand earlier and was released on imposing conditions. In such circumstances, CRMC 2846/09 3 petitioner is not entitled to get interim custody on the ground that police is not competent to effect seizure of the vehicle. As Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act provides for confiscation, it is for the petitioner to approach the District Collector for interim custody and it is for the police to produce the vehicle before the Magistrate for confiscation. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.