SUNIL KUMAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE legal position declared by this Court in the judgment in Raju vs. Circle Inspector (2012 (2) KLT 350) is attracted to the facts of this case.

(2.) THE petitioner's vehicle having registration No.KL-48/C 709 was seized by the Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakkancherry on 14.10.2011 on the allegation that the vehicle has been used for transportation of river sand unauthorizedly. According to the petitioner, there was a valid pass and Ext.P1 is the proof produced before this Court in support of the above plea. After the matter was reported to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, he passed Ext.P3 order whereby the vehicle stands confiscated. This was challenged by the petitioner in revision before the District Collector and the District Collector by Ext.P4 has confirmed the same. Both these orders are under challenge herein.

(3.) ANOTHER aspect pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the light of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sujith vs. State of Kerala (2012 (2) KLT 547), herein the Sub Inspector will have to report seizure to the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vadakkancherry so that the petitioner will be able to move the said court for getting interim custody of the vehicle. In paragraph 13 of the judgment of the Division Bench, the following directions have been issued: