---------- This is an application filed by the petitioner challenging the condition imposed by the Court below in Crl.M.P.9583 of 2013 in Crime No.1918 of 2014 of Karunagappally police station on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the registered owner of mini lorry with No.KL-23A 4032 and which was seized by the Karunagappally police when it was found transporting Kerosene, according to the prosecution, in violation of the provisions of the Kerosene Control Order and Essential Commodities Act and registered a case as Crime No.1918 of 2013 alleging offences under Clause VI of Kerala Kerosene Control Order and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.9583 of 2013 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally for interim custody of the vehicle and the learned Magistrate has granted interim custody on conditions inter alia that apart from executing a bond for `.3 lakhs directing the petitioner to produce solvency certificate or bank guarantee for that amount and also to produce the original title deed of the property for an amount not less than `.3 lakhs as a condition for granting interim custody of the vehicle. That condition is being challenged by the petitioner by filing this petition.
3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court by Annexure-2 order in similar matter directed the release of the vehicle on executing a bond alone. Further, no confiscation proceedings have been initiated in respect of the same as well. So he prayed for allowing the application.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that in case of initiating confiscation proceedings the vehicle will be required and so the conditions imposed is proper.
6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle and it has been seized in connection with the above crime. It is also an admitted fact that it was seized along with certain essential commodities which is required to be transported in compliance with certain conditions which according to the prosecution is violated. However, it is also seen from the order of the Magistrate that there is no confiscation proceedings initiated by the District Collector under the Essential Commodities Act and directed the petitioner to approach the Magistrate Court for getting interim custody of the vehicle which prompted the petitioner to file the application before the Magistrate court. Further in a similar matter, this Court by Annexure-2 order in Crl.M.C.6065 of 2013 directed the Magistrate to release the vehicle after getting the valuation of the vehicle by executing a bond for that amount with two solvent sureties for the like sum. So considering the circumstances this Court feels that condition No.2 imposed by the Court below can be lifted and the Magistrate can be directed to get the value of the vehicle assessed by the Mechanical Engineer of the PWD Department or by a Motor Vehicle Inspector and after getting the value of the vehicle assessed directing the petitioner to execute the bond for that amount with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate keeping the other conditions in tact. So the petition can be disposed of as follows:-
Conditions Nos 1 and 2 imposed by the court below is set aside and the learned Magistrate is directed to get the value of the vehicle assessed either by the Mechanical Engineer of PWD wing or by the Motor Vehicles Inspector and thereafter release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner on getting a bond executed by him for that amount with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate and also imposing conditions nos. 3 to5 as also part of the bond to be executed by the petitioner for getting interim custody. The Magistrate is directed to get the value of the vehicle assessed by the authorities mentioned above, within one week and then after getting the report comply with the direction mentioned above.
With the above directions and observations, the petition is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Court immediately.
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
R.AV