IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. WJC No.569 of 2010
SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
-----------
2. 17.6.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and the State.
The petitioner claims to be the owner of the
tractor in question and seeks release of the same. He
is aggrieved by the order dated 19.5.2010 calling for a
report declining to release the same.
The law stands well settled that when a
vehicle is seized for an alleged offence and an
application for release is filed, it is only the lawful
and registered owner of the vehicle who is entitled to
release of the same upon satisfaction of the Court
concerned and upon such terms and conditions as
the Court may so impose.
The Supreme Court in (2002) 10 SCC 283
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat
referring to Section 451 Cr. P.C. has observed at
Paragraph-7 and 17 as follows:-
7. In our view, the powers under
Section 451, Cr. P.C. should be exercised
expeditiously and judiciously. It would
serve various purposes, namely:-
1. Owner of the article would not
suffer because of its remaining unused or
by its misappropriation;
2
2. Court or the police would not
be required to keep the article in safe
custody;
3. If the proper panchnama
before handing over possession of article is
prepared, that can be used in evidence
instead of its production before the Court
during the trial. If necessary, evidence
could also be recorded describing the
nature of the property in detail; and
1. This jurisdiction of the Court to
record evidence should be exercised
promptly so that there may not be
further chance of tampering with
the articles.
17. In our view, whatever be the situation,
it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles
at the police stations for a long period. It is
for the Magistrate to pass appropriate
orders immediately by taking appropriate
bond and guarantee as well as security for
return of the said vehicles, if required at
any point of time. This can be done
pending hearing of applications for return
of such vehicles.
In the facts and circumstances of the case,
the writ application is disposed off with the direction
that if the petitioner has produced valid registration
papers demonstrating that the tractor in question
stands in his name, it is directed to be released in his
favour upon such terms and conditions deemed fit
including furnishing of a bond and affidavit
undertaking to produce the same as and when the
trial Court so directs during the course of the trial.
Let the order be communicated through
FAX to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
3
Bhojpur, Arrah in connection with Agiaon Police
Station Case No. 24 of 2010 at the cost of the
petitioner.
The application stands disposed.
P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)