Kerala High Court
Ganeshkumar vs State Of Kerala on 8 November, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Crl.M.C No.9436/24 1
2024:KER:83543
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 9436 OF 2024
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
GANESHKUMAR
AGED 53 YEARS, S/O MURUKESAN,
346 RAJAMUDI PUTHUVAL,
KARADIKUZHY, PEERUMEDU,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 688531
BY ADVS.
SRI.AJITH MURALI
SRI.MOHANAN M.K.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682031
2 THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
OFFICE OF DISTRICT MINING AND GEOLOGY,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689645
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
RANNI POLICE STATION,
RANNI (PO),
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689672
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
RANNI POLICE STATION, RANNI (PO),
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689672
Crl.M.C No.9436/24 2
2024:KER:83543
SRI.NOUSHAD K.A., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C No.9436/24 3
2024:KER:83543
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C No.9436 of 2024
---------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of November, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner is the owner of a Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No.
KL-57-F-5681
2. The above vehicle was seized by the 4 th respondent on
05.11.2024 alleging offences punishable under Sections 4(I) and 21 of
the Kerala Minor Mineral (Regulation of Development) Act 1957 (for
short, 'the Act'). Petitioner alleges that the seizure has not been
reported to the jurisdictional Magistrate as contemplated under Section
106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
3. 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 respondents 3 and 4 ought to have, immediately on seizure,
reported the same.
4. 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. (presently Section 106 BNSS), it was
2024:KER:83543
observed that the Police Officers are bound to report the factum of
seizure without delay to the Magistrate.
5. The seizure of the vehicle has not been reported to the
Magistrate yet and respondents 3 and 4 are bound to do so as per law.
6. Accordingly, there will be a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to
report the seizure of vehicle No. KL-57-F-5681 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 order. If any
application for interim custody is filed, the learned Magistrate, before
whom the seizure is reported, shall consider the same and pass orders,
in accordance with law.
The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
vps
2024:KER:83543
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A A TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR PREPARED
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 5.11.2024 AGAINST
THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE.
Annexure-B A TRUE COPY OF THE MINERAL TRANSIT PASS
ISSUED BY THE RANNI GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED
5.11.2024 .
Annexure-C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.01.2024 IN
CRL.M.C NO.284/2024 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 .
Annexure-F TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.9.2024 IN
CRL.M.C. NO.8070/2024 BY THIS HONOURABLE
COURT.
