IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 478 of 2008() ------------------------ CMP.724/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, CHENGANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ------------- SUGATHAN, S/O.GOPALAN, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARAIYIL VEEDU, EDAYARANMULA KARA, ARANMULA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.C.S.DIAS SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.179/2006 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION). 2. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. KANAKAN @ SAJI, S/O.SRI.RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHERIVU PURAYIDAM, KEECHERIMEL KARA, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.K.SIVAKUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 478 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner who claims to be the owner of a Honda Activa scooter bearing registration No.KL-30/246, involved in crime No.179/06 of Chengannur police station for an offence punishable under Section 8(2) of the Kerala Abkari Act, filed CMP No.724 of 2007 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II Chengannur claiming interim custody of the scooter under Section 451 CrPC. The petition was dismissed as per Annexure B order dt.6.3.07, holding that since confiscation proceedings under Section 67 B of the Abkari Act is pending against the vehicle, the Magistrate has no authority to release the vehicle on interim custody. It is the said order which is assailed in this case. I see no reason to disagree with the conclusion reached by the Magistrate in the light of Rule 4(2) of the Kerala Abkari (Disposal of confiscated Article) Rules, 1996 as per which the authorized officer has got the power to release the vehicle on interim custody subject to finalization of confiscation proceedings. Crl.MC No. 478 OF 2008 2 Hence, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the authorized officer, this Crl.MC is dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE btt Crl.MC No. 478 OF 2008 3