Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 280 (MP)

Chandrabhan Singh v. State of M. P.

2016-04-04

SUBHASH KAKADE

body2016
ORDER 1. This revision under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, hereinafter referred to the Code, is directed against the order dated 10.8.2015 passed by learned third ASJ, Katni in Special Case No.22/2014 dismissing the application of the applicant filed under section 451/457 of the Code for granting Supurdginama of motorcycle bearing registration number MP21-MF/2488. 2. The facts in nutshell are that in a criminal case registered against the son of the petitioner Chandrabhan Singh vide Crime No147/2014 under section 8/20(b) of NDPS Act, the aforesaid motorcycle was seized. The petitioner being the owner of the aforesaid motorcycle has preferred an application under section 451/457 of the Code for releasing the offending vehicle on interim custody on Supurdginama, which has been dismissed on 10.8.2015 by learned third ASJ, Katni. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed this petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant has contended that the Court below while passing the impugned order has failed to exercise its jurisdiction vested with him and committed grave error of law in holding that the aforesaid property cannot be given on Supurdginama as confiscation proceedings will be obstructed. It is further submitted that if the seized vehicle is kept for a long time in open space, it will be damaged by vagaries of weather. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State opposed the application on the ground that the vehicle is subjected for confiscation and seized for the offence, which is serious in nature. 5. It is nowhere disputed in the impugned order that the applicant is not the registered owner of the vehicle concern and that the same was not claimed by any other person also. 6. Provisions of section 451 of Criminal Procedure Code provides power to the Court to pass an appropriate order for interim custody and for disposal of seized property pending trial where the property is subjected to natural decay and looking to the other circumstances, to the owner of the property. 7. No fruitful purpose will be served by retaining the vehicle during pendency of the trial or during confiscation proceedings, rather it will diminish the value of the said vehicle, when the petitioner is ready to produce the vehicle as and when called by above mentioned authorities, then certainly the vehicle concerned can be given in the interim custody of the registered owner. It is futile to lay the vehicle idle in the police station or any other unsecured place. When the vehicle concern is not kept in the secured place i.e. garage there is every possibility of it being damaged by vagaries of weather. 8. There is no bar that the property cannot be released looking to the seriousness of the offence. The Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Ganga Hire Purchase Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Punjab and others, reported in (1999)5 SCC 670 , held that interim custody of the seized or to be confiscated vehicle cannot be denied to a person who is registered owner, on the ground that the vehicle is liable to be confiscated. 9. Keeping in view above facts and circumstances of the case, and further in the light of the decision in the case of Ganga Hire Purchase (supra), the impugned order dated 10.8.2015 is hereby quashed. It is directed that seized motorcycle bearing Registration Number MP21-MF/2488 shall be delivered to the applicant on Supurdginama subject to producing the original registration certificate and further on satisfying the following conditions :- (i) That, the applicant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on an undertaking to produce the said vehicle before the trial Court as and when required. (ii) That, the applicant shall got the vehicle photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photographs shall be taken in the presence of the responsible officer, who will be deputed by the trial Court and to be kept in the file of the case. (iii) That, the personal bond of the applicant as well as surety shall carry the photographs of both and the bond of surety shall further carry the photograph of person identifying him before the Court which would be with full residential proof of the surety and the person identifying him. (iv) The applicant shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle and not to lease it to any one and not to alienate or create any third party interest and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make identifiable. (v) The applicant will not allow the vehicle to be used for any anti-social activities. (v) The applicant will not allow the vehicle to be used for any anti-social activities. (vi) In the event of confiscation order by the Court competent, the applicant shall produce the vehicle positively for confiscation. 10. With the aforesaid, this application stands allowed. 11. A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned trial Court/the authority concerned for necessary compliance.