Allowed

Babloo Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2022CRLR/3854/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in Criminal Revision No. 3854 of 2022 set aside the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate refusing release of an impounded JCB vehicle. The Court directed the revisionist to file an application proving ownership within 15 days for the vehicle's release.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 29.08.2022 set aside; liberty granted to file ownership application within 15 days for expedited disposal.

Babloo Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3854 of 2022

¶3

Revisionist :- Babloo Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present revision has been filed for setting aside the Judgement and order dated 29.08.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, in Criminal Case No. 2504 of 2022 (State Vs. Dinesh Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 57 of 2022 under Sections 3/59/72 of U.P.Minor Mineral (Concession) Rule, Section 21 (4) The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station Ghughli, District Maharajranj, whereby release application for releasing the JCB vehicle bearing registration no. UP56AT-1778.

¶7

Learned counsel for the revisionist contends that the revisionist is the owner of the vehicle in question and no useful purpose would be served in keeping the vehicle in question at police station which would result in the vehicle becoming junk. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat 2003 (46) A.C.C. 223 in support of his contention, in which it has been held that it is not desirable in the matter of motor vehicle, the vehicle be kept at the police station for a long time which result in the vehicle becoming junk, therefore, the vehicle-in-question should be released in favour of the registered owner on such terms and conditions as the court below may deem fit and proper. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the decision of this Court reported in 2012 (77) ACC 381 Shyam Singh Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P. and another in support of his contention.

¶8

After hearing the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A., and after perusing the order impugned as well as averments made in the present revision, this Court is of the opinion, that the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the revisionist has substance.

¶9

Accordingly, the order dated 29.08.2022 passed by learned

¶10

Chief Judicial Magistrate, in Criminal Case No. 2504 of 2022 (State Vs. Dinesh Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 57 of 2022 under Sections 3/59/72 of U.P.Minor Mineral (Concession) Rule, Section 21 (4) The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station Ghughli, District Maharajranj, is hereby set aside with the liberty to the revisionist to file an appropriate application alongwith all relevant documents showing the ownership of the vehicle, before the concerned Court below and if such an application is filed within 15 days from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one month, thereafter.

¶11

With the aforesaid directions, this revision is finally disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.12.2022 S.Ali

¶13

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.12.16 17:38:31 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babloo Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babloo Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Ahirwar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Matloob Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Haji Anees and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashutosh Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another