AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT. P1
Copy of the pass issued by k.g.george to the petitioner under the provisions of the kerala minor mineral concession rules bearing serial number 162 for transporting 15 metric ton dated 3/7/2012.
EXT. P2
Copy of the pass issued by k.g.george to the petitioner under the provisions of the kerala minor mineral concession rules bearing serial number 163 for transporting 15 metric ton dated 3/7/2012
EXT. P3
Copy of the pass issued by k.g.george to the petitioner under the provisions of the kerala minor mineral concession rules bearing serial number 164 for transporting 15 metric ton dated 3/7/2012.
EXT. P4
Copy of the pass issued by k.g.george to the petitioner under the provisions of the kerala minor mineral concession rules bearing serial number 164 for transporting 15 metric ton dated 3/7/2012.
EXT. P5
Copy of the fir in crime no.1579/2012 of perumbavoor police station, dated 30/6/2012.
EXT. P6
Copy of the application submitted by the petitioner before the ist respondent, dated 18/8/2012.
RESPONDENT�S EXHIBITS
NIL
The petitioner is aggrieved by the non consideration of Ext.P6 representation for release of the sand seized by the second respondent herein. The case of the petitioner is that for construction of a building in the property having an extent of 7.69 ares in Survey No.489/5 in Perumbavoor Village, he purchased 60 metric tons of ordinary sand from one Shri K.G. George. After purchase, it was transported to the property of the petitioner. The sand was seized by the second respondent on 30.6.2012 and a case has been registered against the petitioner''s son u/s 23 read with Sections 20 and 27 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Ext.P1 is the copy of the FIR in Crime No.1579/2012. The prayer made by the petitioner is for completion of the proceedings by the District Collector.
Learned Government Pleader points out that in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench in Sujith Vs. State of Kerala, a report will have to be furnished before the jurisdictional Magistrate. In the above decision, in para 13 the Division Bench issued the following directions:
It is hereby ordered that the revenue and police authorities, while effecting seizure, shall ensure that any revenue official effecting the seizure, notifies such seizure, also to a police official, over and above the requirement in S.22 of the Act and the Rules. That police official may effect seizure of those goods and report such seizure to the jurisdictional Magistrate in accordance with law and any police officer effecting seizure shall, apart from reporting any such seizure to the jurisdictional Magistrate, also place a report of such seizure before the concerned revenue authority so that action can follow through the criminal court and through the revenue authority in terms of the laws. Following the aforesaid, it is further ordered that in all pending cases, the competent police officer shall effect seizure and report the same to the jurisdictional magistrate, if not already done and the competent revenue authority shall make appropriate complaint to the jurisdictional Magistrate at the earliest. This would also enable the owners of the goods or vehicles to apply for interim custody in terms of S. 451 or 457 Cr.P.C., as the case may be. In ordering release, the Judicial Magistrate shall be guided by the terms laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan Vs. State of Kerala, . The appropriate authorities shall also file complaints for initiating prosecution in all cases, where offences under the Act are disclosed. These directions shall apply in dealing with sand and vehicles, seized by the police or revenue authority under the provisions of the Act or the Code of Criminal Procedure, over and above the directions in Thonikkadavath Shoukathali Vs. The Tahsildar and State of Kerala, , until appropriate legislative provisions are brought in.
In fact, what is sought for by the petitioner is the release of the sand and Ext.P5 will show that the allegation is that without authority and without getting permission, so much quantity of sand has been collected in the property of the petitioner.
There will be a direction to the second respondent to submit a report before the jurisdictional Magistrate, if not already forwarded, within a period of ten days from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition, for enabling the petitioner to seek appropriate orders from the said Court before which the criminal case is pending.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.