✦ Kerala High Court

SARITHA.T v. STATE OF KERALA

N NAGARESH4 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

BY ADV.SRI.SREEJITH V.S.,GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.70 of 2024 :2: J U D G M E N T Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2024 The petitioner is the owner of Bajaj Auto bearing registration No.KL02-AQ3949, having chassis No.MD2A26AZ2DWE32748 and Engine No.BAZWDD29227. The 2nd respondent registered a crime against one Sreekumar, who was sitting inside the autorickshaw when he was found carrying excess quantity of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. The said accused had taken the vehicle owned by the petitioner on hire. No crime is registered against the petitioner. The 2nd respondent has filed Final Report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Karunagappally.

2.

The condition imposed by the 3rd respondent for release of vehicle in Ext.P4 is untenable and liable to be quashed by this Court, as it has been found that the petitioner is not involved in the crime. The insistence of the 2nd W.P.(C) No.70 of 2024 :3: respondent for deposit of huge amount in treasury savings bank account as a condition precedent for the release of the vehicle, is illegal and liable to be interdicted by this Court.

3.

The accused in Ext.P3 pleaded guilty and fined by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I. The same is evidenced by Ext.P5. The petitioner is the main bread winner of her family and the family is affected by the seizure of her vehicle. Unless the respondents are directed to release the vehicle without insisting for deposit of money, the petitioner will be put to great hardship and agony. No confiscation proceedings are contemplated or pending under the Kerala Abkari Act, contends the Counsel for the petitioner.

4.

Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader pointed out that the vehicle of the petitioner is under confiscation proceedings. The Deputy Excise Commissioner has issued Ext.P4 to the petitioner requiring to deposit ₹63,000/- for W.P.(C) No.70 of 2024 :4: giving interim custody of the autorickshaw in question pending confiscation proceedings. The Government Pleader would submit that Section 67C notice is seen issued to the petitioner as can be gathered from Ext.P4. The petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 67E of the Kerala Abkari Act. The writ petition is therefore not maintainable.

5.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

6.

The petitioner's autorickshaw is now under confiscation proceedings for offences under the Kerala Abkari Act. The Deputy Excise Commissioner, Kollam has issued Ext.P4, permitting the petitioner to take interim custody of the vehicle on payment of ₹63,000/-. The petitioner has a remedy to challenge Ext.P4 as per Section 67E.

7.

The petitioner would submit that the petitioner belongs to a poor family and is not in a position to remit W.P.(C) No.70 of 2024 :5: ₹63,000/- for interim custody of the vehicle. The petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied, if confiscation proceedings are concluded expeditiously.

8.

Taking into consideration the afore facts and as delay in concluding the confiscation proceedings would cause undue hardship to the petitioner, it would be only just and proper that the competent authority conclude the proceedings expeditiously. The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 3rd respondent-Deputy Excise Commissioner to conclude the confiscation proceedings as mentioned in Ext.P4, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months. JUDGE Sd/- N. NAGARESH W.P.(C) No.70 of 2024 :6: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 70/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 Exhibit P-2 Exhibit P-3 Exhibit P-4 Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED BY THE RTO, KOLLAM IN RESPECT OF VEHICLE BEARING REG. NO. KL02-AQ3949 DATED 24.10.2013 TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 15/01/2023 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE JFCM-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY. TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 16/22023 DATED NIL FILED ON 02/05/2023 BEFORE THE JFCM-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE EDOKLM/74/2023-Q7(V) DATED 09/02/2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM D.NO.2072/2023 DATED 20.11.2023 ISSUED BY THE JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT, O/O THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY Exhibit P-6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/12/2023 IN W.P.(CRL) NO.676/2023

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments