Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sandeep Vs. State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor and Another

Sandeep vs State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 14, 2015
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1181777

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.MC.No. 6318 of 2015
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sandeep

Respondent

State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor and Another

Excerpt

1. in crime no.612 of 2015 of the udayamperur police station, registered for the offences punishable under section 4(1)(a) read with section 21(1) of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the act ) and rule 58 of kerala minor mineral concession rules, 1967, the accused has approached the court below for getting the vehicle seized in the case, released under section 451 cr.p.c., through c.m.p.no.825 of 2015. 2. the court below, through annexure-1 order dated 20.08.2015, dismissed c.m.p.no.825 of 2015 by entering a finding that the vehicle was seized by the district collector as per the said act, and thereby directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for getting the vehicle released. 3. as per section 21(4) of the act, such a vehicle involved in the offence shall be liable to be seized by an officer or authority specially empowered in that behalf. as per section 21(4a) of the act, such a vehicle shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub-section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such court. in this case, the court below is the competent court to take cognizance of the offence under sub-section (1) of section 21 of the act and, therefore, it is for the court below to enter a decision on the petition filed under section 451 cr.p.c. the court below has failed to exercise its jurisdiction and the power conferred on it and, therefore, annexure-1 order has resulted in substantial miscarriage of justice. in the result, this crl.m.c. is allowed and annexure-1 order is quashed. the court below is directed to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, in c.m.p.no.825 of 2015, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Full Judgment

1. In Crime No.612 of 2015 of the Udayamperur Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Section 4(1)(A) read with Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) and Rule 58 of Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967, the accused has approached the court below for getting the vehicle seized in the case, released under Section 451 Cr.P.C., through C.M.P.No.825 of 2015.

2. The court below, through Annexure-1 order dated 20.08.2015, dismissed C.M.P.No.825 of 2015 by entering a finding that the vehicle was seized by the District Collector as per the said Act, and thereby directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for getting the vehicle released.

3. As per Section 21(4) of the Act, such a vehicle involved in the offence shall be liable to be seized by an officer or authority specially empowered in that behalf. As per Section 21(4A) of the Act, such a vehicle shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub-Section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such court. In this case, the court below is the competent court to take cognizance of the offence under sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of the Act and, therefore, it is for the court below to enter a decision on the petition filed under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The court below has failed to exercise its jurisdiction and the power conferred on it and, therefore, Annexure-1 order has resulted in substantial miscarriage of justice.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-1 order is quashed. The court below is directed to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, in C.M.P.No.825 of 2015, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial