Allowed

Anil Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2018CRLR/2856/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision set aside an order refusing vehicle release due to unclear police reports on chasis numbers. The court directed release by enforcing a bond with sureties under Supreme Court precedent and ordering a clear police report.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned order; directed release of vehicle with bond and sureties; ordered fresh order after clear police report.

Anil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2856 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Anil Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohd. Sarwar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Learned A.G.A. was granted time to file counter affidavit in this case vide order dated 11.9.2018, same has not been filed. Court has no option but to hear the case since the vehicle in dispute would become useless if not released.

¶6

This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 5.7.2018 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 4th, Jaunpur, arsing out of Case Crime No.1028/17, under Sections 41, 411, 414, IPC, P.S. Rampur, District Jaunpur.

¶7

Vide impugned order the court below has refused to release the vehicle in favour of the revisionist on the ground that the police has submitted report wherein the registration number and engine number are unclear and chasis number is also deferring.

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the vehicle registration number of his motorcycle is UP62BJ4742, engine number is B1171533B. The police station has submitted report wherein it has stated that the chasis number is BE/11715378153/3RX. A copy of the chasis number has been brought on record and shows the chasis number as B1171533B. After capital letter B there is a sign of oblique or Y, which has created the confusion.

¶9

From the perusal of the report of the police it is clear that the digits mentioned in the chasis number has been manipulated by the police and number three in the last has been removed and replaced by numbers 78153/3. The police report is not correct.

¶10

In view of above, order dated 5.7.2018 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 4th, Jaunpur in Case Crime No.1028/17 is, hereby, set aside. Court below is directed to pass a fresh order after calling for a clear

¶11

report from the police in accordance with law within a period of three weeks. Since there is no rival claimant of the vehicle even after the fresh report is called some discrepancy exists, the revisionist shall be required to execute bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below and as per para 17 of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, 2002 LawSuit (SC) 1346 , shall release the vehicle in favour of the revisionist with further undertaking that he will not sell the vehicle in dispute to any person and shall produce the same whenever directed by the court before it.

¶12

The revision stands allowed.

¶13

Order Date :- 12.12.2018 T. Sinha

Anil Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babloo @ Akhilesh and Another Vs State of U.P. and another

Mool Charan Lal Vashist Vs State of U.P.

Chaman Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

rajat kulshrestha Vs State of U.P. and another

Veeru @ Virendra SIngh Vs State of U.P. and another

Rakesh and 2 Ors. Vs State of Up and Anr.