Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 212 (ORI)

Anil Kumar Agrawal v. State of Orissa

2005-03-29

R.N.BISWAL

body2005
JUDGMENT R. N. BISWAL, J. — This revision is directed against the order dated 18.11.2004 passed by the J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in G.R. case No.239 of 2004 wherein he rejected the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. and refused to release the Mini-truck bearing Registration No.OR-03-7695 in favour of the petitioner. 2. The nub of the facts leading to filing of this revision is that on 15.9.2004 at about 5 P.M. getting reliable information that the aforesaid truck was being loaded with rice at Bangomunda Block godown for illegal transaction the A.S.I. of Bangomunda P.S. made station diary entry to that effect and rushed to the block office to find that the truck with loaded rice had already left for Kantabanji. He pursued the truck and intercepted it on the P.W.D. road in between Bangomunda and Kantabanji. On inspec¬tion of the truck 144 sacks each containing 50 K.Gs. of rice were found therein. On demand of document if any, in respect of trans¬portation of the rice the driver Kashinath Pradhan produced some cash receipts and way bills which were found to be forged. So, the A.S.I. seized the truck along with the rice, drew up plain paper F.I.R. and lodged it before the O.I.C. of Bangomunda police station,who registered a case for the offence under Sections 406/465/468/471/120-B I.P.C. against five accused persons includ¬ing the driver of the truck, giving rise to the aforesaid G.R. case. 3. On 11.11.2004 the petitioner filed a petition under Section 457 Cr.P.C. through his counsel before the J.M.F.C., Kantabanji for release of the truck in his favour till conclusion of the criminal proceeding. After hearing learned counsel for the parties the learned J.M.F.C. rejected the petition holding that accused Kashinath Pradhan was transporting the seized rice with knowledge of the petitioner. 4. Being aggrieved with this order the petitioner has preferred the present revision. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that after seizure the truck has been kept at the police station prem¬ises being exposed to vagaries of nature whereby its condition is deteriorating day by day. The petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused in the aforesaid case but the Court below rejected his petition under an erroneous impression that he has a hand in the alleged crime. The petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused in the aforesaid case but the Court below rejected his petition under an erroneous impression that he has a hand in the alleged crime. Relying on the decision Sunderbhai Ambala Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2003) 24 OCR (SC) 444 he submitted that it is of no use to keep the seized vehicle at the Police Station for a long time. The Magistrate should have passed an appropriate order immediately to release the vehicle on proper terms and condition. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel supported the finding of the Court below. 5. As found from the impugned order, the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question. There is no rival claimant for it. The petitioner has not been arrayed as an ac¬cused in the instant case. Since the case has been registered under Section 406/465/468/120B I.P.C. there is no scope of con¬fiscation of the truck. In an appropriate case a vehicle can be released even in favour of an accused under Section 457 Cr.P.C. So suspicion of the Magistrate about the complicity of the petitioner in the crime in question alone is not a ground to reject the petition under Section 457 Cr.P.C. If the vehicle is allowed to be kept without use at the police station premises being exposed to sun and rain any further naturally it would be junked and rendered useless. It is not only a loss to the petitioner but also a national loss. Under such circumstances, keeping in view the decision in Sunderbhai Ambala (supra) the impugned order deserves to be set aside. Accordingly, the order dated 18.11.2004 passed by the J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in G.R. case No.239 of 2004 is hereby set aside. The truck bearing Registration No.OR-03-7695 be released in favour of the petitioner on furnishing property security worth Rs.2,00,000/- on the conditions that he shall keep the truck in question in good running condition; shall not transfer the ownership of the truck; shall not change the registration number, chassis and Engine number and colour of the truck in any manner and shall produce the truck before the Court below as and when required. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision is allowed. Crl. Revision allowed.