IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3442 of 2008() ------------------------- CMP.4176/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOTTAYAM CRIME NO.217/08 OF PAMPADY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: 4TH ACCUSED ----------------------- BIJU P. GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, KEECHAL BHAGOM, PUTHUPALLY KARA, PUTHUPALLY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAMPADY. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3442 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has come to this court claiming to be aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for release of a lorry to him under Section 451 Cr.P.C. 2. The said lorry was involved in crime No.217/08 of Pambadi police station. Crime is registered under the provisions of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The crux of the allegations is that 204 sacks of ration wheat were illicitly transported in the said vehicle. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the vehicle and he has been arrayed as the 4th accused. The petitioner applied for release of the vehicle. The said prayer was rejected by the impugned order. 3. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no proceedings has been initiated for confiscation of the vehicle under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. In these circumstances, it is submitted that it is absolutely unnecessary to insist that the vehicle should remain in custody of Crl.M.C.No.3442/08 2 the court/police until final disposal of the case. Subject to any appropriate terms and conditions, the vehicle may be directed to be released to the petitioner, it is prayed. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor confirms that no proceedings for confiscation of the vehicle under the Essential Commodities Act is pending. The learned Public Prosecutor only submits that appropriate safeguards may be insisted and the vehicle can be released to the petitioner subject to appropriate terms and conditions. 4. I must alertly remind myself of the decision in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat [SC 2003(2) KLT 1089]. Every court must zealously ensure that valuable property is not unnecessarily exposed to sun and rain and left to suffer damage and deterioration. Subject to appropriate conditions, I am satisfied that the vehicle can be released to the petitioner. 5. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C is allowed. b) The impugned order is set aside. The vehicle in question that is KL-05-Y-5473 shall be released to the petitioner Crl.M.C.No.3442/08 3 on the following terms and conditions: i) The petitioner shall produce before the learned Magistrate all documents to show that he is the person entitled to possession of the vehicle. ii) He shall execute a bond for the value of the vehicle with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. iii) The petitioner shall, in the bond to be executed by him, undertake that the vehicle shall not be used while it is in his possession for commission of any offence under the Essential Commodities Act. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3442/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.3442/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008