Disposed

Mohd. Sadique Alam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy (Home), Govt. of U.P. Civil Secy. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2024CRLP/6981/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning illegally detained motor vehicle. The State admitted a challan was filed late due to technical error. The Court set aside impugned orders rejecting release and directed the Magistrate to reconsider the application within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside. Trial Court directed to dispose of vehicle release application afresh after hearing within 30 days.

Mohd. Sadique Alam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74630

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6981 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mohd. Sadique Alam

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy (Home), Govt. Of U.P. Civil Secy. Lko. And Another

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Singh,Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/owner of the motor vehicle No. BR 11 PC 5361, which has been illegally detained in the police Station-Ram Janmbhoomi, Ayodhya with the following prayers:-

¶10

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI thereby quashing the impugned order dated 02/08/2024 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No.6, Ayodhya / Faizabad in Criminal Revision No. 2774/2024 and order dated 23/05/2024 passed by Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)-II / Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ayodhya in Release Application in Case No. 55/2024, under section 207 Motor Vehicle Act 1988, as contained in Annexure No. 1 & 2 to this writ petition.

¶11

ii. Issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and directing the court concerned to pass release order of the vehicle of the petitioner, bearing Vehicle No. BR11 PC 5361."

¶12

The grievance of the petitioner/owner of the said motor vehicle is with regard to the fact that his vehicle bearing Registration No.BR 11 PC 5361 has been illegally detained by the police station-Ram Janmbhoomi, Ayodhya and an application for release of the same was given in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second/A.C.J.M., Ayodhya and the same was rejected on 23.05.2024 on the ground that no challan with regard to said vehicle has been presented in the Court. The revision petition filed against the said order has also been dismissed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Ayodhya vide order dated 02.08.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No.2774 of 2024 only on the ground that the challan has not been filed in the Court.

¶13

In this regard, a query has been made by this Court and it is answered by the State that the challan has now been filed in the Court and it was due to some technical error that the challan could not be

¶14

uploaded on the app. Thus, now it is reflected that the challan has been filed by the police with regard to the vehicle in question.

¶15

In view of the above, the instant writ petition filed by the petitioner/owner of the said vehicle, namely, Mohd. Sadique Alam is disposed of with the direction that, since the challan with regard to vehicle No.BR 11 PC 5361 has now been filed/ uploaded by the police, the trial Court/Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second/A.C.J.M., Ayodhya shall dispose of the release application of the petitioner/owner of the said vehicle moved before him, which was rejected on 23.05.2024, afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard.

¶16

In result, both the impugned orders of date 23.05.2024 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second/A.C.J.M., Ayodhya and of date 02.08.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Room No.6, Ayodhya, are set aside.

¶17

A copy of this order be immediately sent to the trial Court/Magistrate concerned for strict compliance.

¶18

It is further provided that the Magistrate concerned would be under an obligation to dispose of the release application already moved by the petitioner/owner of the said vehicle before him within 30 days from production of a certified copy of this order before him, without being guided by any observation of the revisional Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 12.11.2024 Vinay/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Sadique Alam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy (Home), Govt. of U.P. Civil Secy. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Sadique Alam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy (Home), Govt. of U.P. Civil Secy. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Haseena Begum Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Viresh Singh @ Viresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Ramvir Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Priyanka Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Munna Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Smt. Shilpa Devi Thru. Mr. Pankaj Kumar vs Siya Ram and Another