IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3965 of 2009(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABHILASH, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, NJATTUVEETTIL HOUSE, CHEMBUCHIRA HOUSE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.RAJENDRAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARANDARAPPILLY, THRISSUR. 4. GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No.3965 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that three tipper lorries bearing registration Nos. KL-45A-41,KL-45-B 9113 and KL-8AG- 5999 were taken by him on hire. It is stated that while he was transporting ordinary earth from Vellarampadam in Varandarappilly Panchayat, the 3rd respondent intercepted the vehicles and registered crime alleging offence under Section 279 IPC. It is stated that the lorries are still in the custody of the 3rd respondent and Ext.P2 series are the mahazars which show that the allegation against the petitioner is under Section 279 IPC. The writ petition has been filed complaining that without any justification the vehicles have still under detention of the 3rd respondent. 2. Government Pleader on instruction submits that without having obtained permits under the Kerala Minor WP(c).No.3965/09 2 Mineral Concession Rules, the petitioner was transporting red earth and it was therefore proceedings have been initiated. It is stated that the proceedings are pending before first respondent and in view of the pendency of this writ petition final orders have not been passed. 3. As already noticed, the vehicles have been seized on 3.2.2009 and from that date onwards the vehicles are under detention of the 3rd respondent causing heavy loss to the petitioner. No proceedings are, so far seen to have been, initiated. In such circumstances, irrespective of whether the matter is pending before the first respondent or not, it is only appropriate that the vehicles are released to the petitioner. The 3rd respondent shall therefore release the aforesaid vehicles to the registered owner of the vehicles, on their filing an undertaking before the 3rd respondent that the vehicles will be produced as and when called for and that pending finalization of the proceedings, the vehicles will not be alienated or encumbered. It is clarified that this judgment will WP(c).No.3965/09 3 not stand in the way of the first respondent initiating or continuing the proceedings against the registered owner or against the petitioner, the hirer. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/