Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1616 (KAR)

Buransab v. State Of Karnataka

2019-07-08

ASHOK G.NIJAGANNAVAR

body2019
JUDGMENT : Ashok G. Nijagannavar, J. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 12.04.2019 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.16/2019 by the Prl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Vijayapura and the order dated 06.02.2019 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC Sindagi, in Kalkeri P.S. Crime No.6/2019 rejecting the application filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. and to pass order for interim release of the vehicle namely tractor bearing Reg.No.KA-28/TA-2294 and trailer bearing Reg.No.KA-28/TA-2295. 2. The facts briefly stated are that the petitioner being the registered owner of the vehicle namely the tractor bearing No.KA-28/TA-2294 and trailer bearing No.KA-28/TA-2295 had filed application for release of the said vehicle before the Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Sindagi, as the said vehicle was seized in Crime No.6/2019 for the offences punishable under Section 379 IPC, on the allegations of theft of sand by making use of the said vehicle. The said application was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner had preferred Criminal Revision Petition before the Prl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Vijayapur. On hearing the parties, the revision petition was dismissed on the reason that both tractor and trailer were used for committing similar offences within a period of one month from the date of release of the said vehicle as per the earlier order passed by the Civil Judge & JMFC Sindagi, in Kalkeri P.S. Crime No.159/2018 vide order dated 08.01.2019 and also that the petitioner has failed to produce the documents particularly registration certificate to show the ownership of the said vehicle. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Special Court, the petitioner has challenged the said order. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records. 4. As could be seen from the records, the photo copies of the registration certificate book and certification of registration and certificate of fitness, etc., are pertaining to vehicle bearing No.KA-28/TA-2294 tractor and trailer bearing No.KA-28/TA-2295 are produced. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner is registered owner of the tractor and trailer. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has gracefully admitted that despite the order passed by the learned Civil Judge & JMFC, Sindagi for interim release of the vehicle in Kalkeri P.S. Crime No.159/2018 by imposing certain conditions. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner is registered owner of the tractor and trailer. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has gracefully admitted that despite the order passed by the learned Civil Judge & JMFC, Sindagi for interim release of the vehicle in Kalkeri P.S. Crime No.159/2018 by imposing certain conditions. The petitioner has violated the conditions and has used the said vehicle for commission of similar offence, namely, theft and illegal transportation of sand. Considering this reason the second application filed in Crime No.6/2019 of Kalkeri P.S. was rejected by the learned Civil Judge & JMFC, Sindagi. Even in the revision petition, the learned Sessions Judge/Special Court was of the same view that the petitioner is not entitled for interim release of the vehicle as he has violated the conditions imposed for interim release of the vehicle as per the earlier order dated 08.01.2019. 6. It is submitted that the petitioner is an agriculturist and he is deprived of opportunity to use the vehicle to his agricultural activities during this sowing season. As a result of which he is put to much hardship. Further he has undertaken to furnish reasonable cash surety and also to forfeit the same in the event of violating any of the conditions to be imposed for release of the vehicle. 7. In a decision reported in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2003) SCC(Cri) 1943 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued the guidelines for release of seized properties has observed: "Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Ss.451 and 457 - Disposal of mudammal articles, kept in police custody, pending trial - Expeditious and judicious exercise of power under S.451 needed - Purpose of such exercise of power stated - Procedure for custody and disposal of valuable articles and currency notes, vehicles, seized liquor and narcotic drugs laid down. Held: The powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely: 1. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation; 2. Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody; 3. If the proper panchnama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody; 3. If the proper panchnama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and 4. This jurisdiction of the court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles." 8. Admittedly, the vehicle is in police custody since 29.01.2019, as such, there is every likelihood of chances of said vehicle getting rusted without proper maintenance. As a result of which the petitioner will be put irreparable loss. 9. Considering the need of the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that lenient view may be taken in order to give one more chance to the petitioner to get his vehicle released to his interim custody, subject to the terms and conditions. 10. In the event of violation of any of the conditions or if the said vehicle is used for commission of similar offences, the cash security to be imposed stands forfeited to the State Government. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Sindagi is directed to release the said vehicle, i.e. tractor bearing Reg.No.KA-28/TA-2294 and trailer bearing KA-28/TA- 2295 in Crime No.6/2019 of Kalakeri Police Station in favour of the petitioner subject to following conditions: (1) The petitioner shall execute an indemnity bond for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate; (2) The petitioner shall furnish the cash security of Rs.25,000/- which shall be deposited before Special Court, prior to release of the vehicle. (3) The petitioner shall furnish the details of the R.C. and other documents pertaining to the vehicle before the Trial Court for its perusal; (4) The petitioner shall not change the colour and machinery of the said vehicle without permission of the Court pending disposal of the case; (5) The petitioner shall produce the said vehicle as and when required by the Trial Court during the pendency of the trial and he shall not alienate or transfer the said vehicle without prior permission of the Court during the pendency of the trial. The petitioner shall furnish the photographs of the vehicle to be released showing the registration number. In the event of violation of any condition, the cash security shall be forfeited to the Government.