Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MARUTHI AUTO FINANCE,KOTHAMANGALAM versus STATE OF KERALA THROUGH DEPUTY RANGER

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MARUTHI AUTO FINANCE,KOTHAMANGALAM v. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH DEPUTY RANGER - Crl MC No. 2176 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 14896 (3 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2176 of 2007()

1. MARUTHI AUTO FINANCE,KOTHAMANGALAM,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH DEPUTY RANGER,
... Respondent

2. BABU SUKUMARAN, PUTHUKERIL HOUSE,

For Petitioner :SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :03/08/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 2176 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2007

O R D E R

The petitioner claims to be the financier in respect of a vehicle which has been seized by the Forest officials on the allegation that the vehicle was used for illicit transportation of sandal wood pieces. The vehicle has been lying in the custody of the forest officials. No other claimant has come before the authorities for custody of the vehicle. The petitioner applied before the learned Magistrate for release of the vehicle. The learned Magistrate rejected the prayer for release of the vehicle.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order. In the total absence of any other claimant, it must have been held that the petitioner is the person who is most entitled for possession of the vehicle.

3. In this Crl.M.C. notice was sent to the alleged registered owner of the vehicle. He has not entered appearance. He has sent a letter to the Registrar to say that he is not interested in any manner in the vehicle. The vehicle is exposed to sun and rain and it is unnecessarily undergoing deterioration. The petitioner has a Crl.M.C.No. 2176 of 2007 2 substantial stake on the vehicle in as much as the loan advanced by him has to be recovered. In these circumstances the petitioner prays that subject to appropriate conditions, the vehicle may be released to the petitioner.

4. The learned Prosecutor submits that the State does not have any objection against release of the vehicle, but it may be on appropriate and strict conditions. The learned Prosecutor submits that either deposit of the value of the vehicle may be insisted or the petitioner may be directed to furnish bank guarantee.

5. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I am of the opinion that it is only necessary to insist that the vehicle shall be available as and when required by the court. Every court must remind itself of the decision in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat (AIR 2003 SC 638), where the Supreme Court has commented on the sad spectacle of valuable properties undergoing damage and deterioration in court premises. Subject to appropriate conditions, the vehicle can be directed to be released to the petitioner.

6. This Crl.M.C. is allowed. The vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on the following terms and conditions by the learned Magistrate. Crl.M.C.No. 2176 of 2007 3 (1) The petitioner shall produce all the documents before the learned Magistrate to show that he is interested in the vehicle and is entitled to claim custody. (2) He shall deposit an amount of Rs.12,500/- and execute a bond for Rs. 50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate shall scrupulously ensure that the sureties produced are sufficient and solvent. (3) The petitioner, in the bond to be executed by him, shall specifically undertake to produce the vehicle before the learned Magistrate as and when directed and before the authorities under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act, if a valid direction is issued by such authority eventually. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.