IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2531 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.408/2008 OF THE JFCM COURT-I, PERINTHALMANNA. .................... PETITIONER: ------------ ABDUL RASHEED, S/O MOIDEEN KUTTY, PCHEERIKUTH HOUSE, CHERUKARA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLATHUR THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER AT HIGH COURT OF KERALA, 2. THE SPECIAL SQUAD, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTALMANNA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2531 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008 ORDER A vehicle belonging to the petitioner was allegedly involved in the commission of an offence punishable under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 (for short `the Act'). No crime was registered in respect of that infraction. The petitioner's vehicle was seized by the revenue authorities. The petitioner had come to this Court and as per an order dated 7/3/08 in Crl.M.C.No.1026/08, the vehicle was directed to be released to the petitioner subject to conditions. Inter alia, the condition was imposed that the petitioner must deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/-. 2. The petitioner has now come before this Court seeking release of the said amount of Rs.25,000/-. According to the petitioner, no crime is registered. The revenue authorities have already initiated proceedings under the Act. The revenue authorities have, in lieu of confiscation, imposed penalty which Crl.M.C. No. 2531 of 2008 -: 2 :- penalty has already been paid and discharged by the petitioner. In these circumstances, it is prayed that there is absolutely no necessity or justification to insist on the continuance of the cash deposit in court. It is prayed that the said amount may be directed to be released to the petitioner. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, confirms that the penalty imposed under the Act by the revenue authorities has already been paid and discharged by the petitioner and that, in these circumstances, it is not necessary to insist on retention of the cash deposit of Rs.25,000/- in court. I am satisfied that the prayer in this petition can be allowed. 4. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) The amount of Rs.25,000/- which is said to be lying in cash deposit in obedience to the direction dated 7/3/08 in Crl.M.C.No.1026/08 shall now be released to the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge