IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4038 of 2009 ---------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 62/09 OF UDUMBANCHOLA EXCISE RANGE) .......... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- RAMANI, W/O.RAMANADHAN, UDUMBANCHOLA PANCHAYATH VIII/134, UDUMBANCHOLA P.O., NAMARI KARA, CHATHURANGAPARA VILLAGE. BY ADVS. MR.ANIL GEORGE, MR.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY. RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, UDUMBANCHOLA, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, COCHIN – 31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.4038 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 14th December 2009 O R D E R Vehicle No.KL-7.Q/7295 was seized by Excise Range Officer, Udumbanchola in crime No.62/2009. Petitioner filed Annexure-A1 application under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure for interim custody of the vehicle. Petition was returned to the petitioner by written the order in the application itself, to the effect that petition is not maintainable as the vehicle was not produced before the court. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash that order. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Crmc 4038/09 2 Prosecutor were heard. 3. When the vehicle was not produced before the learned Magistrate, no petition under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure would lie. It is for that reason learned Magistrate returned Annexure-A1 application with the endorsement that vehicle is not produced and so the petition is not maintainable. True, even though vehicle is not produced, if factum of seizure is reported to the Magistrate, interim custody could be given under Section 457 of the Code. But this petition is filed without approaching the Magistrate by filing a petition under Section 457 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence I do not find any reason to interfere with that order. If confiscation proceedings are Crmc 4038/09 3 already initiated, remedy of the petitioner is to approach the concerned authority as provided under Section 67 B of Abkari Act and not before the Magistrate. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.