Beerbahadur Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of CrPC being aggrieved by order dated 23.02.2018 passed by II ASJ Sidhi camp Court

Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi, in Criminal Revision No.260/2017 arising out of order dated 30.08.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi in Crime No.315/2017. whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 of CrPC has been dismissed.

Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 24.08.2017 Police Station Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi received information from the informer that owner of

vehicle/tractor bearing No. M.P.-53-M/2218 and trolley No.M.P.-53-M/2219 is transporting illegal sand. On such information, Police apprehended the

said vehicle and registered offence punishable under Sections 379 and 414 of IPC; Sections 9, 27 & 51 of Wild Life Protection Act; Sections 41, 52 of

India Forest Act; vide crime No.315/2017 against the owner and driver of the vehicle.

The petitioner filed an application under Section 457 of CrPC for “Supurdginama†of the seized vehicle. The application was rejected by the

JMFC, Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi vide order dated 30.08.2017 and order of rejection was affirmed by the IInd ASJ, Sidhi camp Court Rampurnaikin,

District Sidhi vide order dated 23.02.2018 in CNR No. MP 53070006292017.

The petitioner has filed Registration certificate, Certificate of Insurance cum Policy Schedule, Permit of transportation and vehicle fitness certificate

with regard to vehicle/tractor bearing No. M.P.-53-M/2218 and trolley No.M.P.-53-M/2219.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that impugned orders are illegal and arbitrary. It is further submitted that the vehicle is parked in open

place in the police station and if is will remain in open place it will be damaged. On these grounds prayer is made to release the vehicle on

“Supurdginama.â€​

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition. He stated that the aforesaid vehicle is under the confiscation proceedings. Hence, it

cannot be released in favour of the petitioner.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 290 Hon'ble the Apex

Court has clearly and unambiguously has held that the vehicle or equipment seized shall be released within a period of 15 days as far as practicable for

keeping the vehicle in open would caused damaged to the vehicle.

On the other hand learned counsel for the State relied on Ramniwas Vs. Game Range Chambal Sanctuary Bhind Headquarter, Ambah District

Morena 2012 CRI. L.J. 1747.

It is not in dispute that the said vehicle is not required during the trial. As per Rule 53 of the M.P. Minor mineral Rules, 1996. There is a question for

determination “whether the case of the petitioner is covered under the proviso of Rule 53 of the M.P. Minor mineral Rules, 1996 or not?â€​

Looking to the reason stated in the application it appears that the trial will take some considerable time, meanwhile it is not proper that the said vehicle

be kept in open and in unsecured condition and keeping in view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai

(supra), petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 23.02.2018 passed by II ASJ Sidhi camp Court Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi, in Criminal Revision

No.260/2017 arising out of order dated 30.08.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rampurnaikin, District Sidhi in Crime No.315/2017 is

hereby, set aside.

Subject to production of the original registration certificate and insurance certificate. Accordingly, it is ordered that the vehicle/tractor bearing No.

M.P.-53-M/2218 and trolley No.M.P.-53-M/2219 seized in connection with Crime No.315/2017 be given to the petitioner on interim custody till the

disposal of the case or the final disposal of the confiscation proceeding, if any, before the Forest Department, whichever is earlier on the following

terms and conditions:-

(i) That, the petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh 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 petitioner shall get the vehicle photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number of the tractor and trolley.

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 petitioner 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 in defying him.

(iv) The petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle and shall not lease it to anyone and not make or allow any changes in it

to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

(v) The petitioner will not allow the vehicle to be used any antisocial activities and for similar offence failing which this order shall become ineffective

immediately.

(vi) In the event of confiscation order by the Court competent, the petitioner shall keep the vehicle present positively for confiscation.

(vii) The petitioner is also directed to produce the Bank Guarantee of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) for two years before the

concerned trial Court for the aforesaid purpose.

The petition is allowed in above terms.

A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.