IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 36 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CMP.NO.11945/09 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, KOTTARAKKARA. ......... (CRIME NO.825/09 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION) ........ PETITIONER(S): CLAIMANT: ------------------------------------------ OMANAKUTTAN, S/O.BHASKARAN PILLAI, KONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, KURIYODU MURI, CHADAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA. BY ADV. MR.ALEXANDER GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No.36 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 19th day of January,2010 ORDER A gold chain weighing 12.400 grams was produced in Crime 825/2009 of Chadayamangalam Police Station registered for the offences under sections 7 and 8 of Gaming Act, along with the nokia and samsung mobile phone, seized. Petitioner claiming to be the owner of the gold chain filed CMP 11945/2009 under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for getting the gold chain and the nokia mobile phone released. By Annexure 2 order the petition was dismissed. Annexure 2 order shows that in CMP 11945/2009 petitioner pressed only relief of release of the gold chain. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure 2 order contending that eventhough notices were issued Crl.M.C.36/2010 2 to all the other accused who were arrested and present at the scene of offence when the seizure was effected, none of them raised any claim and therefore learned Magistrate was not justified in rejecting the claim. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. The prosecution case itself is that the gold chain was seized in the presence of the petitioner and the other accused. The seizure was on the allegation that accused committed the offence under section 7 and 8 of Gaming Act. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner the other accused did not raise any claim, in spite of the fact that a notice in the application filed by the petitioner was served on all the accused. Prosecution has also no case that the gold chain does not belong to the petitioner. In such circumstance, learned Crl.M.C.36/2010 3 Magistrate is not justified in refusing to grant interim custody of the gold chain, especially when the gold chain is not necessary for the purpose of trial of the case. Petition is allowed. Annexure 2 order is quashed. Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kottarakkara is directed to release the gold chain produced in Crime 825/2009 of Chadayamangalam Police Station as sought for in CMP 11945/2009 to the petitioner on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate and on condition that petitioner shall produce the same as and when required and shall not transfer the same. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006