Allowed

Ram Singh Alias Kishori Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Aug 2018Cr.Rev./501/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand quashed the Additional Sessions Judge's order rejecting a vehicle release application. Relying on a verification report confirming the Petitioner was the Power of Attorney holder of the vehicle's owner and noting neither party was an accused, the Court directed the trial court to release the Scorpio vehicle.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 16.02.2018 is quashed and set aside with a direction to the trial court to release the vehicle to the petitioner.

Ram Singh Alias Kishori Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 501 of 2018

¶2

Ram Singh @ Kishori Singh ... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party

¶4

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.

¶6

03/14.08.2018 Heard Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Lily Sahay learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶7

This application has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Hazaribag in connection with Chauparan P.S. Case No. 168/2017, corresponding to S.T. No. 35/2018, by which the release application preferred by the petitioner for release of the Scorpio vehicle bearing registration no. WB 38N 5946 has been rejected.

¶8

Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the original owner of the vehicle is one Deepak Kumar Jaiswal and the petitioner was giving the vehicle on hire to different persons on the basis of power of attorney executed by Deepak Kumar Jaiswal. Learned counsel also submits that admittedly Deepak Kumar Jaiswal is the owner of the vehicle and since neither Deepak Kumar Jaiswal nor the petitioner has been made an accused in the criminal case, the vehicle deserves to be released in favour of the petitioner.

¶9

Mrs. Lily Sahay, learned A.P.P. for the State on the other hand has produced at the Bar a copy of the verification report dated 13.08.2018 and has stated that on verification it was found that Deepak Kumar Jaiswal is the owner of the vehicle in question which was being run by the petitioner on the basis of power of attorney executed by Deepak Kumar Jaiswal.

¶10

-2-

¶11

Since there was some discrepancy in the impugned order dated 16.02.2018 as to whether the petitioner was actually the power of attorney holder of Deepak Kumar Jaiswal or not with respect to the vehicle in question an order was passed on 10.07.2018 directing Mrs. Lily Sahay, learned A.P.P. to file a supplementary affidavit annexing a copy of the verification report.

¶12

The verification report has been produced at the Bar from which it appears that Deepak Kumar Jaiswal is indeed the owner of Scorpio vehicle bearing registration no. WB 38N 5946 and that the petitioner is the power of attorney holder of Deepak Kumar Jaiswal. The vehicle in question appears to be a commercial vehicle and it is also an admitted fact that neither the owner Deepak Kumar Jaiswal nor the present petitioner have been an accused in the criminal case in which the vehicle was apprehended and some miscreants were found carrying arms as they were preparing to commit dacoity.

¶13

In view of the verification report, therefore, the status of the petitioner as the power of attorney holder and Deepak Kumar Jaiswal as the owner with respect to the said vehicle is proved beyond doubt.

¶14

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Hazaribag in connection with Chauparan P.S. Case No. 168/2017, corresponding to S.T. No. 35/2018 is hereby quashed and set aside with a direction to the learned trial court to release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner, subject to the terms and conditions it may so impose.

¶15

This application stands disposed of.

¶16

Let a copy of the verification report be kept on the record.

¶17

(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶18

Alok/-

Ram Singh Alias Kishori Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh Alias Kishori Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samir Kumar Gupta And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Binay Panna Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Nand Lal Sahu Alias Nand Lal Prasad And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Pratima Devi Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Asgar Ali Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Lalit Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand