Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1553 (PAT)

Dilip Rai @ Dilip Kumar v. State Of Bihar

2008-10-22

SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH

body2008
Judgment 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the instant writ application petitioners no. 1 and 2 have filed the writ application for quashing the seizure of vehicle Nos. BR-06G-1542 and BR-06A-5127 respectively in Piar P.S. Case No. 24/08 registered under Section 7 of the E.C. Act, on the basis of the written report of Block Supply Officer, Bandra, dated 29th March, 2008. 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the Block Supply Officer made seizure of the aforesaid trucks from near the house of one Ranjan Thakur as well as from the house of one Akhileshwar Thakur and about 400 kgs. of rice and foodgrains were seized. It is alleged that the bags were machine stitched, having mark of F.C.I. etc. It is also alleged that the aforesaid foodgrains which was meant for distribution to the poor villagers were stored in the house of his other associate for the purpose of black- marketing. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are owners of the public carrier. Charge is yet to be framed. Learned counsel submits that it has yet to be proved that the said foodgrains which were being carried are the same foodgrains which were lifted for the purpose of blackmarketing. He further submits that they are not praying for quashing of criminal prosecution. 5. The learned counsel for the State submits that huge quantity of foodgrains had been lifted from F.C.I. godown by the dealers and instead of distributing the same to the card-holders they have got the same stored in the premises of Akhileshwar Thakur and Rajan Thakur for the purpose of blackmarketing. He submits that the foodgrains can be disposed of only in terms of Section 451 of Cr.P.C. 6. This Court at present is not going into the merit of the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. The trucks in question stand seized since 29th March, 2008. It is common knowledge that such vehicles are vulnerable to vagaries of nature in case they are kept in open space generally without adequate care. The Hon ble Apex Court in case of Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai reported in 2004(3) PLJR 244 (SC) emphasised the exigency of release of public carrier in favour of the owners after taking appropriate security. 7. The Hon ble Apex Court in case of Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai reported in 2004(3) PLJR 244 (SC) emphasised the exigency of release of public carrier in favour of the owners after taking appropriate security. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances if petitioners file an application before the S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur (East), in Piar P.S. Case No. 24/08 the learned Magistrate after due verification of the ownership of the vehicles would release the same in his favour on adequate security. The owners of the vehicles would also give undertakings that they would produce the vehicles as and when required. The release of the vehicles will be subject to result of criminal prosecution. 8. With the aforesaid observation this writ application is allowed to the extent stated above. 9. Let the order be faxed to the concerned authority at the cost of the petitioners.