Remanded

Smt Sadhana Joshohara Dutta v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC14 Jun 2022CRR/1785/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court entertained a revision against an order rejecting an application for the return of a seized truck. Recognizing the vehicle's value to the petitioner and concerns over exposure to elements, the court directed the trial court to grant interim custody subject to a bond, bank guarantee, and undertaking to produce the vehicle for trial or confiscation.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to grant interim custody of the seized vehicle to the petitioner on condition of executing a bond of Rs.5,00,000 along with a bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000.

Smt Sadhana Joshohara Dutta Vs State of West Bengal — Property and Title | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

14.6.2022 Court No.29 Sl. No. 71 SD

¶2

CRR 1785 of 2020

¶3

In the matter of: Sadhana Joshohara (Dutta) Mr. Susnigdho Bhattacharyya	….petitioner. …for the Petitioner.
Mr. Prasun Kumar Dutta
Md. Kutubuddin
Mr. Santanu Deb Roy	… for the State.

¶4

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated December 2, 2020, passed in C. Case No. 04/2020 by Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bongaon, present revisional application has been preferred.

¶5

The allegation levelled is on January 12, 2020 a team of officers intercepted one TATA Ace pick up vehicle bearing No. WB 27 2484 at Railway Play ground - Bongaon which was carrying illegally total 228 number of live Indian soft shelled turtles and 49 numbers dead of soft shelled turtles. Accordingly, on interception the said turtles were recovered and seized and the driver and helper of the truck were arrested and they were produced before the learned Magistrate and subsequently, they were released on bail by the learned Magistrate.

¶6

The petitioner claimed himself to be the owner of said TATA Ace pick up vehicle bearing no. WB 27 2484 which was seized by the Seizure Officer in connection with Complaint Case No.POR05/BNG of 2019-20 dated January 12, 2020.

¶7

It is contended by petitioner that seized articles were loaded in the said vehicle without informing the owner of the vehicle. On

¶8

¶9

November 18, 2020, the petitioner filed an application under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Magistrate for releasing of the seized truck. After hearing respective parties and after perusing the prayer of the enquiry officer for an order of confiscation, the learned ACJM by an order dated December 2, 2020 has been pleased to reject the petition for returning the seized vehicle. Learned Magistrate further opined that the goods recovered are required to be confiscated under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act.

¶10

It is contended by Mr. Bhattacharyya Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a reputed woman in the locality having no criminal antecedent whatsoever. The vehicle is the only source of income of the petitioner and the seized truck is being kept in an uncared manner under the open sky and accordingly prayed for releasing of the vehicle in question in any terms and conditions.

¶11

In this context the petitioner has also relied upon judgments reported in (2004) 1 SCC 293, 2003 C Cr LR (Cal) 929, (2016) 4 CHN (cal) 713 and also three unreported judgments passed by this Court in CRR 1882 of 2019, CRR 537 of 2020 and CRR 695 of 2012.

¶12

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to me that there is no necessity to keep the said vehicle under the open sky to get it damaged further and no purpose will be served by making it junk day by day.

¶13

Accordingly, learned ACJM, Bongaon is directed to grant interim custody of the vehicle in question to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner will execute a bond of Rs.5,00,000/along with bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner will also file a coloured photocopy of the

¶14

¶15

vehicle signed by both the investigating agency and the registered owner. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before the court below that he shall produce the vehicle when it would be asked to produce either for the trial or for confiscation proceeding and petitioner will not change the basic nature and character of the vehicle without taking leave of the court.

¶16

CRR 1785 of 2020 is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

The office of the Legal Remembrancer is directed to regularize the appointment of Mr. Prasun Kumar Dutta along with Md. Kutubuddin and Mr. Santanu Deb Roy in this matter.

¶18

(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)

Smt Sadhana Joshohara Dutta v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sadhana Joshohara Dutta v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pialy Bhattacharjee Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Suresh Babu @ Arakkal Arjunan Suresh Babu Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Arun Kr Chattopadhyay Vs Smt Rupa Karpas & Anr.

Sujit Kumar Biswas Vs State of West Bengal

Amit Kumar Ray Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Partha Sarthi Roy Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.