Najim Khan vs State of M.P.

Subhash Kakade, J.—With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally.

This application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 16.12.2013 passed in Criminal Revision No. 255/2013 by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, District Chhindwara affirming the order dated 20.11.2013 passed in Criminal Case No. 1570/2013 by learned Judicial Magistrate, Junnardev, Chhindwara whereby an application filed by the applicant under the provisions of Section 451/457 of Cr.P.C. for handing over the possession and custody of truck bearing registration number MH 40 Y/2892.

As per the prosecution story, on 20.9.2013, on an information the truck concern was checked, 14 calves, 14 cows and one dead calf have been seized. The truck concern has been seized and offence under 4, 6 and 9 of M.P. Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004 and also u/s 11 of Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act has been registered against. An application filed by the applicant for handing over the possession and custody of concern truck, which was rejected by learned Judicial Magistrate against which a revision was filed, which was also dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, hence, this application.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant has contended that learned courts below while passing the impugned orders have failed to exercise its jurisdiction vested with it and committed grave error of law in holding that the aforesaid property will require at the time of trial. It is further submitted that if the seized vehicle be kept for a long time in open space at the police station, it will be damaged by vagaries of weather.

Learned Panel Lawyer 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.

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.

Provisions of Sections 451 & 457 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 speedy and natural decay and looking to the other circumstances, to the owner of the property.

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 applicant 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 not kept in the secured place i.e. garage there is every possibility of it being damaged by vagaries of weather.

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. Vs. State of Punjab and Others, 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 u/s 60 of the Act.

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 orders dated 16/12/2013 and 20/11/2013 are hereby quashed. It is directed that seized truck bearing registration number MH 40 Y/2892 shall be delivered to the applicant on Supurdginama subject to producing the original registration certificate and permit and further on satisfying the following conditions:-

(i) That, the applicant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lacs 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 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.

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

With the aforesaid, this application stands allowed.

A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned trial Court/the authority concerned for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.