The High Court dismissed a revision petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court rejected the plea for zimma (bond for retention) of a vehicle seized due to fake documents and pending enquiry by RTO. Liberty was granted to approach the appropriate court later.
Application dismissed; liberty granted to move appropriate court for zimma of the vehicle.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010028452020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet. 113/2020
1:AJRUDEEN
S/O SAHID KHAN, VILL-31 CHOPRA KI DHANI KHO NAGORIYAN, JAIPUR, P.S-BGHOR, DIST-JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D J DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 10.02.2020
Heard Mr. D.J. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
By this application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 06.01.2020 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Nalbari in connection with Ghograpar P.S. Case No. 415/2019, by which the zimma petition No.4954/19 was rejected.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this application he has filed the copy of National Permit, Tax Clearance Certificate, Authorization Certificate of
Page No.# 2/2
National Permit, Certificate of Fitness, Insurance Certificate and it is submitted that he also has the original documents which can prove that the petitioner was the owner of the vehicle. It is further submitted that if the vehicle is allowed to be stand in police custody, there is every likelihood of damage of the said vehicle.
Heard the learned APP who has supported the impugned order.
From the order impugned herein, it is seen that the vehicle in question was being used for transportation of 450 bags of urea inspite of wheat without any challan. As per the said order, the I/O found that the accused persons were carrying fake documents and, as such, by seizing the registration certificate, the I/O had sent the same to the DTO (RTO, Jagatpura) for ascertaining the genuineness of the registration certificate, but no reply has received till date. Accordingly, considering that the petitioner had been possessing fake documents, prayer for zimma was refused.
In the absence of the registration certificate and enquiry report by the I/O as regards genuineness of the seized documents, this Court finds that the issuance of notice will not serve the purpose, because once the prosecution takes a plea that the documents carried with the vehicle are fake, the genuineness of the documents is required to be ascertained before releasing the vehicle on zimma. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to entertain this revision and the same is dismissed.
However, considering the fact that the I/O has already sought for an enquiry report from the concerned RTO, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move the appropriate Court for zimma of the vehicle in a manner as the petitioner may be advised.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the revision application seeking quashing of the order rejecting zimma of the vehicle should be entertained in view of the pendency of enquiry into the genuineness of the documents.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajrudeen
The State of Assam
Kalyan Rai Surana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
