Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 954 (CAL)

Rabi Ranjan Ojha v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2011-07-19

ASIM KUMAR RAY

body2011
JUDGMENT 1. THIS revisonal application has been filed challenging the order dated 13.5.2011 passed in N.D.P.S. Case No. 7 of 2010 by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Paschim Midnapore thereby rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to return the seized car. 2. MR. Pushphal Satpathi, learned Advocate appearing tor the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is the owner of the Car. It is alleged that the car was used for carrying narcotic substance i.e. 20 kg. of Ganja from the side of Orissa towards Kharagpur-Kolkata through National Highway-60. The car was detained at Hasimpur' under P.S. Dantan, Paschim Midnapore. The case has been charge sheeted. The petitioner /owner of the car has not been sent up in the charge sheet. Investigating Officer prayed for his discharge as no evidence was there against him. The petitioner submitted an application praying for getting back the car but the learned Court below has rejected it. The order may be interfered with and set aside. He has referred a decision reported in 2003 C Cr LR (SC) 122 (Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat) in support of his contention. Mr. Joydeep Biswas, learned Advocate appearing for the O.P./ State has contended that car has registration of the State of Orissa. It was carrying narcotic substance and detained within the Slate of West Bengal, District-Paschim Midnapore. It had no valid permit to ply in the State of West Bengal. The order impugned as specific and based on substitutive reasoning. It may not be interfered with. 3. PERUSED the order impugned and the charge sheet submitted in this case. The charge sheet shows that the petitioner is the owner of the car/Xylo Mahindra car bearing Registration No. OR-05AK/9289. It is an admitted fact that the car has been seized in connection with the case pending before the learned Court below and is now lying at the police station. The FIR in connection with the case was registered on 19.11.2010. It reveals from the charge sheet that no evidence was collected against the petitioner /owner and he has no involvement in connection with the case. The vehicle is lying idle and gaining dust at the police station since the date of seizure i.e. initiation of the case through FIR being No. 189 of 2010 dated 19.11.2010, more specifically to say for the last eight months. The vehicle is lying idle and gaining dust at the police station since the date of seizure i.e. initiation of the case through FIR being No. 189 of 2010 dated 19.11.2010, more specifically to say for the last eight months. The learned Court below has pointed out in the order that the car had no valid permit to travel in West Bengal. It is not clear as to whether any separate case has been registered regarding the fact that the car was plying in West Bengal without permit. The Hon'ble Apex Court has observed in the decision noted above that, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep seized vehicles at the police station 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." It is an admitted fact that the vehicle is lying idle for the last eight months approximately. 4. TAKING this background in judicious mind. I do find reason to express that the order refusing the return of the seized vehicle calls for an interference in it specially when the owner of the vehicle has no involvement in connection with the case. The seized vehicle Xylo Mahindra model bearing No. OR-05AK/9289 be returned to its registered owner after verification of the relevant papers on furnishing a Bank Guarantee of Rs. 5 lacs with the condition that he shall not change the nature and character of the vehicle without prior permission of the learned Court below and to produce it as and when called for. The order impugned do hereby set aside. The revisional application stands allowed.