IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 2ND ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3399 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CRRP.4/2010 of SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD CMP.1241/2010 IN LPC NO.37/1998 IN C.C.382/1995 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KASARAGOD. .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- AMBA MOHAMMED, S/O.ABDULRAHIMAN, RATNAKUNJA VILLAGE, ASHOOR MANZIL AT PALETHADI, RATNAKUNJA POST, PUTHUR TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE, NOW RESIDING AT SAFAR AT KUWAIT, REP.BY HIS POWR OF ATTORNEY HOLDER-NASEEB, S/O.AMBA MOHAMMED, ASHOOR MANZIL AT PALETHADI, RATNAKUNJA POST, PUTHUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN, SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, (SHO, ADHUR POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, PUTTUR, D.K.DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. 3. K.MONU @ URIYAKKI MONU, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, KAJAROK HOUSE, KOILA, UPPILINGADI, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3399 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Alleging that petitioner is not the accused and his property was wrongly attached under Section 83 of Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 84 of Code of Criminal procedure. As the claim petition was not filed within the period provided under sub-section (1) of Section 84, petitioner filed another petition to condone the delay. By Annexure-F order, Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod, dismissed the petition to condone the delay. Petitioner challenged that order before Sessions Court, Kasaragod in Crl.R.P.No.4/2010. Learned Sessions Judge, under Annexure-G order, dismissed the revision holding that the explanation offered by the petitioner for the inordinate delay of about three years casts strong suspicion with regard to the bona fides. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexures-F and G orders and to allow the petition filed under Section 84 of Code of Criminal Procedure, after CRMC 3399/10 2 condoning the delay. 2. Sub-section (4) of Section 84 of Code of Criminal Procedure provides that any person, whose claim or objection has been disallowed, in whole or in part, by an order under sub-section (1) of Section 84, may institute a suit to establish the right which he claims in respect of the property in dispute within a period of one year from the date of such order. 3. In view of sub-section (4) of Section 84 of Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner was asked why he did not opt to institute a suit claiming the right as provided under sub-section (4) of Section 84 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel then submitted that petitioner has already instituted a suit before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Puthur. In such circumstances, granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions in the civil suit, this petition is disposed. 24th September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv