Kerala High Court
Sethu G S vs State Of Kerala on 27 March, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 3013 OF 2024
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
SETHU G S
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O, SUBASH P N,
GOPURATHIL HOUSE,
KUNNAMTHANAM, MANTHANAM P O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689581
BY ADVS.
AJITH MURALI
MOHANAN M.K.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 691523
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
KEEZHVAIPUR POLICE STATION, KEEZHVAIPUR (PO).,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 689587
4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
KEEZHVAIPUR POLICE STATION, KEEZHVAIPUR (PO).,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 689587
Crl.M.C.No.3013 of 2024
-:2:-
BY ADV.
M.C. ASHI
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.3013 of 2024
-:3:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.3013 of 2024
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 27thday of March, 2024
ORDER
The petitioner is the registered owner of an Excavator bearing
Registration No. KL-05-AV-0133. The above vehicle was seized by the 4th
respondent on 25.03.2024 alleging offences punishable under Sections 4(I)
and 21 of the Kerala Minor Mineral (Regulation of Development) Act 1957
(for short, 'the Act'). However, the said seizure has not been reported to
the learned Magistrate under Section 102 of Cr.P.C and instead has been
reported to the 4th respondent, who is the Competent Officer under the
Act.
2. Sri.Ajith Murali, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended
that the failure to report the seizure to the Magistrate is contrary to law
and that the 4th respondent ought to have reported the same.
3. In the decision in Crl.M.C.No.1484/2023, this Court considered the
question as to whether the seizure ought to be reported to the Magistrate.
After observing that there are no contrary provisions in the Act as against
Section 102 Cr.P.C., it was observed that the Police Officers are bound to
report the factum of seizure without delay to the Magistrate.
4. The seizure of the vehicle has not been reported to the
Magistrate yet and the 4th respondent is bound to do so as per law.
5. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 4th respondent to
report the seizure of vehicle bearing Registration No. KL-05-AV-0133 to the
jurisdictional Magistrate, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a
period of 48 hours from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6. If in the event of any application for interim custody of the
vehicle is filed, the same shall be considered by the learned Magistrate in
accordance with law.
This criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
Jka/27.03.24
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure-A A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION OF THE PETITIONER IN JCB
BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KL-05-AV-0133.
Annexure-B A TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR
PREPARED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED
25.3.2024 AGAINST THE PETITIONER'S
VEHICLE.
Annexure-C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.3.2024
IN CRL.M.C NO.2766/2024 BY THIS HONORABLE
COURT.
Annexure-D A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
26.9.2022 IN CRL.M.C NO.6387/2022 BY THIS
HONORABLE HIGH COURT.
Annexure-E TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.8.2023
IN CRL.M.C.NO.6886/2023 BY THIS HONORABLE
COURT.
