Kerala High Court
Abdul Nishad.K vs The State Of Kerala on 12 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.1262 OF 2021(G)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 1615/2020 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,MANJERI
CRIME NO.327/2020 OF KARUVARAKUNDU POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
ABDUL NISHAD.K.
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. KUNHALAN, KACHERI HOUSE, PUNNAKKAD,
KARUVARAKUNDU P.O, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.R.RANJITH (MANJERI)
RESPONDENT/STATE:
THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGHC OURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031 FOR THE STATION
HOUSE OFFICER, KARUVARAKUNDU POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
OTHER PRESENT:
PP T.R.RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.M.C.NO.1262 OF 2021
2
ORDER
Dated this the 12th day of March 2021
The challenge in this Criminal M.C. is against
Annexure-A order, by which the petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 451 Cr.P.C., seeking interim
custody of his vehicle, Maheendra Pick-up Jeep
bearing registration number KL-10-AK-9396 was
rejected by the jurisdictional court.
2. The vehicle was seized in connection with
Crime No.327/2020 registered at the Karuvarakundu
Police Station alleging commission of offences under
the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of
Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and Section 379 of I.P.C.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
only reason for rejection of the petition is the
objection raised by the learned Public Prosecutor that
the accused had absconded after committing the
crime. The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and
is not an accused. Moreover, the alleged commission
CRL.M.C.NO.1262 OF 2021
of the crime was on 16.08.2020. Therefore, the mere
fact that the accused had absconded cannot be a
reason for rejecting the petition filed by the owner of
the vehicle.
3. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
I find substance in the contentions urged on behalf
of the petitioner. Hence, Annexure-A order is set
aside and the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I,
Manjeri is directed to reconsider the petitioner's
application for interim custody and to pass
appropriate orders thereon without further delay. In
the event of the prayer for interim release being
allowed, the court shall impose appropriate
conditions as mandated in Shan v. State of Kerala
[2010 (3) KLT 413 (F.B.)]
The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
NB
CRL.M.C.NO.1262 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P 1615/2020
OF J,FM.C-1, MANJERI DATED 27-11-2020
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A. TO JUDGE
