ABDUL NAZEER Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed by the petitioner to modify condition No-I in Annexure A1 order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vatakara in Crl. M.P. No. 1630/2014 under S. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the registered owner of KL-65/A. 460 Hyundai Eon Era Plus Car. The car involved in an abkari Crime No. 25/14 of Vatakara Excise Range without his knowledge and he has not been made an accused as well. Even S. 67B of the Abkari Act is not attracted in such cases as evident from sub-clause (2) of S. 67C of the Abkari Act itself. So, petitioner filed an application for interim custody of the vehicle and the learned Magistrate by Annexure A1 order allowed the application on condition that he will have to furnish cash security of Rs. 2,10,000/- as condition for getting interim custody. On account of this, he is finding it difficult to get the vehicle released. He is prepared to furnish property security instead of cash deposit So, petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief:

(2.) Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 4 of The Kerala Abkari (Disposal of Confiscated Articles) Rules, 1996 envisages that for getting temporary custody of the vehicle which was intended to be confiscated by the authorities for involving in abkari offence, the amount equivalent to the value of the vehicle has to be deposited in the Treasury and on producing the deposit receipt, the vehicle can be temporarily released by the authorized officer. In order to remove the difficulties caused to the owners of the vehicle on account of the same, now S. 53B was added to the statute by Amendment Act 3 of 2010 which came in to effect from 07.12.2009, whereby it can be released on executing sufficient bond by way of cash security equal to the market value of Such vehicle or conveyance. If it is cash security, then, the purpose will be defeated. He is prepared to furnish property security for this amount and court is at liberty to create a charge on the property which the petitioner is proposed to produce as well.