IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 4TH MAY 2010 / 14TH VAISAKHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1260 of 2010() ------------------------- CMP.2814/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: --------------- GANESH.R., S/O. RAJAN, MULAMOOTTIL VEEDU, PADINJATTINKARA MURI, KOTTARAKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS/COUNTER PETITIONER & STATE: --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EZHUKONE POLICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI K M FIROZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH,J --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.NO. 1260 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of May, 2010. O R D E R Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20.3.2010 on C.M.P.No.2814/2010 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kottarakkara arising from Crime No.178/2010 of Ezhukone Police Station. The vehicle allegedly belonging to the petitioner was found in abandoned state and that was seized by the Police. Petitioner wanted interim custody of the vehicle. Learned Magistrate called for report for the SHO concerned. The SHO objected to release of the vehicle at that stage since it was necessary to ascertain by scientific test whether the engine and chassis number shown on the vehicle are correct. Learned Magistrate dismissed the petition allowing in the petitioner to move again after getting report of the scientific expert. Learned counsel says that a verification of the relevant records with the RTO concerned would have been sufficient Crl.M.C.NO. 1260 OF 2010 2 to varify correctness of engine/chassis number and that the vehicle is remaining identical resulting in loss to the petitioner. On the facts and circumstances, I do not find anything illegal in the learned Magistrate saying that before engine and chassis number found on the vehicle are properly verified, the vehicle cannot be released. As such, no interference is required with the order under challenge, also since right of the petitioner to claim release of the vehicle is not forclosed for ever. At the same time, the vehicle cannot be kept idle for long. Hence, I direct the SHO concerned and the expert to whom examination of the vehicle is entrusted to expedite their proceeding and submit appropriate report to the learned Magistrate. If there is inordinate delay in getting the report, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate again. With the above direction, this petition is dismissed. Crl.M.C.NO. 1260 OF 2010 3 THOMAS P JOSEPH,JUDGE. pm