Allowed

Bhagat Ram v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Nov 2017CRR/1008/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision concerns the release of a seized motor vehicle. The Special Court had initially rejected an application by the accused for interim custody on grounds of irreparable loss due to weather decay. The High Court relied on Supreme Court precedents and directed the vehicle's release to the applicant upon furnishing a surety and executing specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The seized motor vehicle motor cycle Honda CG 04 LD 1196 be released to the revisioner on furnishing a personal bond and surety of Rs.50,000/- each.

Bhagat Ram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No.1008 of 2017

¶4

Bhagat Ram S/o Nanku Ram Aged About 50 Years R/o Gullu, Police Station Arang, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Revisioner/Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Arang, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Non Revisioner/Respondent

¶9

For Revisioner/applicant : Shri Pradeep Singh Rathore, Advocate For respondent/State : Shri Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma Order On Board

¶11

15.11.2017

¶12

1 . This revision is preferred assailing the order dated 04.10.2017 passed by Special Judge under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act'), Raipur wherein the said Court rejected the application of the revisioner under Section 457 of the CrPC for interim custody of the vehicle - Motor Cycle Honda CG 04 LD 1196, which was seized in connection with offence registered in Police Station Arang vide Crime No.312/2017 under Section 20(b) of the Act.

¶13

2 . As per the revisioner, he is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and moved an application before the said Court on the ground that if the vehicle is not released, he will suffer irreparable loss as the vehicle is prone to natural decay on account of weather conditions for a long time. If it remains idle in

¶14

¶15

the custody of police personnels it will become unusable after sometime.

¶16

3 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the application.

¶17

4 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraphs 7 and 17 of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujrat, reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 has laid down the guiding principles for releasing the vehicle seized by police. For ready reference the relevant portion is reproduced below:-

¶18

“7. In our view, the powers under Section 451 CrPC should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely:

¶19

owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation;

¶20

court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody;

¶21

if the proper panchnama before handing over possession of the article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and

¶22

this jurisdiction of the court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles.”

¶23

XXX

¶24

In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the polices for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.”

¶25

¶26

5 . Similar stand has also been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court recently in the case of Multani Hanifbhai Kalubhai Vs. State of Gujrat & Another, reported in 2013 (3) SCC 240 , wherein the Supreme Court has expressed that it is not advisable to keep the seized vehicle in the police station in open condition which is prone to natural decay on account of weather conditions for a long period.

¶27

6 . The accused/revisioner is the registered owner of the vehicle which was seized by the police of Police Station Arang Raipur.

¶28

7 . In the instant case, no useful purpose would be served if the vehicle is allowed to get exposed in the extreme weather conditions at the police station. On the contrary, if the vehicle can be released to the revisioner subject to certain conditions the same can be used so that the vehicle does not become junk after some time.

¶29

8 . For the foregoing reasons, it is directed that said vehicle be released in favour of the revisioner on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Court (NDPS), Raipur on the following conditions.

¶30

(I) During trial of the case he will not transfer the vehicle and will produce the same as and when required in the case upon direction of the court.

¶31

(ii) If any order is passed regarding the vehicle, the revisioner will produce the vehicle on the direction of the authority;

¶32

¶33

9 . With the aforesaid observations, the revision stands disposed.

¶34

SD/(Ram Prasanna Sharma)

¶35

JUDGE

¶36