IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 1ST ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 27230 of 2008(N) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SREEDEVI, W/O. LENIN, AGED 39 YEARS, ASHA NIVAS, H.NO.9, MARADU P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G RESPONDENTS(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KANNUR. 3. MECHANICAL ENGINEER, PWD, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.V. MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.27230 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner's vehicle bearing Registration No. KL-5/Q- 4656 has been seized on allegations of commission of an abkari offence and proceedings were initiated under the Abkari Act by 2nd respondent for confiscation of the vehicle of the petitioner. Interim custody has been granted by Ext.P3 on conditions mentioned therein. The petitioner is aggrieved by the valuation of the vehicle, the directions in Ext.P3 to deposit the value of the vehicle so assessed and to produce the vehicle in the 1st week of every month before the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, the valuation is very high since the same does not represent the market value of the vehicle and the direction to deposit the amount is arbitrary. He also submits that no useful purpose would be served by producing the vehicle in the 1st week of every month other than to inconvenience the petitioner. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) to call for the records which lead to the issuance of Ext.P3 and to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction, quashing conditions 2 and 4 (a) in Ext.P3. W.P(C)No.27230 of 2008 - 2 - ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to give interim custody of the vehicle bearing Reg. No. KL-5/Q-4656 to the petitioner;” 2. The learned Government Pleader opposes the same. According to him, the valuation has been properly done and the conditions mentioned in Ext.P3 are very reasonable. Having considered the rival arguments, I am not inclined to interfere with either the valuation or the direction to deposit the value of the vehicle as a condition for interim custody of the vehicle. However, I feel that condition No.4(a) in Ext.P3 has to be modified. Condition No. 4(a) is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required by 2nd respondent or the investigating agency or the court dealing with the criminal case relating to the abkari offence alleged to have been committed using the vehicle. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs