Kerala High Court
Moideen vs State Of Kerala on 19 May, 2012
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2012/26TH ASHADHA 1934
WP(C).No. 16595 of 2012 (Y)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
MOIDEEN, AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O.KUNHULIMMA, KALMATTA COTTAGE,
SANTHIPALLOM POST, KUMBALA, KASARAGOD.
BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI.
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, KASARAGOD-671 101.
3. THE S.I. OF POLICE,
BADIAKA POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 101.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SUNITHA VINOD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 16595 of 2012 (Y)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXT.P1 COPY OF THE R.C. BOOK OF THE MARUTHI CAR NO.KL-14-H/5711.
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.419/2011 OF BADIADKA
POLICE STATION.
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF REMITTANCE OF FINE BY THE
2ND ACCUSED DATED 19/05/2012.
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 12/03/2012.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rs.
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
........................................
W.P.(C).16595/2012
..............................................
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2012
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the owner of a Maruti Alto Car bearing registration No.KL-14-H/5711. The vehicle was taken custody in connection with Crime No.419/2011 of Badiadka Police Station. It appears that on seizure of the vehicle, in connection with the aforesaid case involving offences under the Abkari Act, the vehicle has been handed over to the second respondent for proceeding under Section 67 of the Abkari Act. At that stage, petitioner made an application to the second respondent for interim custody of the vehicle. Accordingly, the second respondent got the value of the vehicle assessed at Rs.1,75,000/- and issued Ext.P4 notice to the petitioner, calling upon him to deposit the value in a savings account in the District Treasury. It is aggrieved by the aforesaid condition requiring deposit of the value of the vehicle, this writ petition has been filed.
W.P.(C).16595/12 2
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. In my view, the condition requiring deposit of the value of the vehicle in its entirety is an onerous one and interest of the respondents will also be safeguarded if the petitioner is called upon to furnish adequate security instead of deposit of the value as above.
4. Therefore, I modify the condition in Ext.P4 requiring deposit of the value into one requiring the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee from a Nationalized Bank for the full value of the vehicle.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing that instead of the value as ordered in Ext.P4, if the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee W.P.(C).16595/12 3 obtained from a Nationalised Bank for the full value of the vehicle, the vehicle in question will be released to him pending finalisation of the proceedings already initiated against the vehicle.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mrcs /true copy/ PA To Judge