STIJIL JOSE Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order under challenge in this Crl.M.C. is the one at Anx.II dated 9.3.2015 rendered by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda, on Crl.M.P. No. 1858/2015 in Crime No. 2003/2014 of Pudukkad Police Station, registered for offences under Secs.392, 411 read with 34 of the I.P.C., whereby the prayer of the petitioner for interim custody of the motor cycle seized in connection with the impugned crime was declined.

(2.) Heard Sri. Sreekumar G. Chelur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State of Kerala.

(3.) The petitioner is not am accused in the impugned crime. But the motor cycle belonging to him has been allegedly used in the commission of the impugned crime, which was said to have been committed by the accused therein. The court below appears to have been persuaded to pass the impugned order by taking note of the fact that the accused in the offence have involved in so many similar crimes and even that the motor cycle in question has also been used for the purpose of committing offences in various parts of the Ernakulam and Thrissur districts, etc.