IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30714 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.ABDURAHIMAN, S/O.AHAMMAD KOYA, PURAKKAT HOUSE, KODAMPUZHA, FEROKE COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 30714 of 2009-H ------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.Sunny Mathew, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is the registered owner of a goods vehicle bearing registration No.KL-10Y-977. The said vehicle was seized by the first respondent on 9.10.2009 and crime No.489 of 2009 of Feroke Police Station was registered against the petitioner alleging commission of the offence of theft of river sand punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner submits that though a crime was registered, till date the Sub Inspector of Police has not reported the seizure of the vehicle to the competent Magistrate having jurisdiction or submitted a report to the District Collector. He submits that that the sand carried in his vehicle was covered by a valid pass, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2 and therefore the seizure of his vehicle and its detention are illegal. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to grant interim custody of the vehicle to him. 3. Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits on instructions that the petitioner’s vehicle W.P(C) No. 30714 of 2009-H 2 was seized in connection with the commission of the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that the registration of the crime was reported to the competent Magistrate Court and therefore the petitioner can move that Court seeking release of the vehicle. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since till date, a report about the seizure of the vehicle has not been filed in the Magistrate Court and the vehicle has not been produced before the Magistrate, the petitioner is not in a position to move the Magistrate Court seeking interim custody either under Section 451 or Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. In my opinion as a crime has been registered against the petitioner alleging commission of the offence of theft of river sand, the Sub Inspector of Police ought to have filed a report as required under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Magistrate so that the petitioner can move the Magistrate seeking release of his vehicle. In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to file a report within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment in the competent Magistrate Court having jurisdiction about the factum of seizure of the petitioner’s vehicle, in connection with crime No.489 of W.P(C) No. 30714 of 2009-H 3 2009 of Feroke Police Station. The first respondent shall thereafter inform the petitioner about the factum of filing such a report within three days from the date of filing of the report. It will open to the petitioner at that stage to move the competent Magistrate Court seeking release of the vehicle. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab