B.D. Agarwal, J -- 1. The order dated 20.3.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi in Hailakandi PS Case No. 506 of 11( GR Case No. 1234 of 2011) is under challenge in this criminal petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Heard Mr. R. De, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. BB Gogoi, learned Addl. PP for the State. The private respondents have not appeared though the names of the learned counsel have been reflected in the Cause List. 3. Mr. De, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 have taken loan from the petitioner No.1 for purchasing three numbers of vehicle (Buses) and did not clear the loan amount. Thereafter, the financial institution/petitioner No. 1 instituted an arbitration proceeding and award has also been passed in favour of the bank. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that in the meanwhile, all the three hypothecated buses bearing registration Nos. AS-24/C-2744, AS-24/C-2745 & AS-24/C-2746 were seized by the police in the aforesaid police case. Having learnt about the seizure the bank applied for custody of the vehicles. The custody prayers were allowed by the learned CJM vide order dated 18.2.2012. After keeping the vehicles for about one year, the bank filed a petition before the learned CJM, Hailakandi on 19.3.2012 seeking leave of the court to allow the bank to auction the vehicles to realize the loan amount. However, the said prayer has been rejected by the learned CJM. 5. In the order dated 18.2.2012, the learned CJM himself has recorded that the vehicle owners did not appear to oppose the custody prayer despite notices. In this criminal petition also the learned counsel has not appeared. Besides this, the buses are lying in the custody of bank since last more than one year and if any further delay is caused to dispose of the vehicles it will gradually become scrap due to regular depreciation of the property. Even otherwise, the Investigating Officer must have made sufficient progress in the investigation of the case and physical production of the buses in the court may not be necessary. The identification of the buses may be proved through photographs and other documents. 6. In view of the above reasoning, the impugned order is hereby set aside. Even otherwise, the Investigating Officer must have made sufficient progress in the investigation of the case and physical production of the buses in the court may not be necessary. The identification of the buses may be proved through photographs and other documents. 6. In view of the above reasoning, the impugned order is hereby set aside. The petitioners are allowed to dispose of the buses by way of auction with due intimation to the learned CJM, Hailakandi. The petitioners shall also give an account of the sale proceeds to the court. With the aforesaid direction, the criminal petition stands disposed of.