Disposed

Khairullah Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Sept 2020Cr.Rev./250/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal revision petition against an order rejecting release of a seized Scorpio vehicle. Instead of adjudicating merits, the Court directed the lower court to verify ownership documents via a report and release the vehicle if genuine, claiming a bond and undertaking from the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was disposed of with a direction to the lower court to release the vehicle subject to verification of documents and the petitioner filing a bond with sureties.

Khairullah Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

- 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.250 of 2020

¶3

Khairullah Ansari …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA

¶7

--------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. P. K. Appu, A.P.P --------- 02/Dated: 02nd September, 2020

¶8

1. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 06.01.2020, passed by the court of learned District & Sessions Judge – II, Garhwa in S.T. No.226 of 2019, whereby the prayer for release of Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No.JH14D-2109, in favour of the petitioner has been rejected.

¶9

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the registered owner of the aforesaid vehicle.

¶10

It is argued that the court below has rejected the prayer for release of the Scorpio vehicle in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the vehicle was used in commission of dacoity and the petitioner is an accused in the aforesaid case registered under Section 395 I.P.C.

¶11

3. Learned A.P.P., has opposed and submitted that the petitioner had not produced any document in proof that he was the registered owner of the vehicle.

¶12

4. Heard. It is noticed as a matter of common experience that large number of vehicles are kept under the open sky in an uncared manner in the premises of the police station and due to vagaries of weather the vehicles decay and over a period of time the vehicles become junk. In such situation it is desirable that the Magistrate should give appropriate direction for handing over the vehicle to the owner or the person from whose possession the vehicle has been seized, by taking appropriate bond and guarantee for return or production of the said vehicle, at any time, if required, by the court.

¶13

- 2 -

¶14

In Sunderbhai Ambala Desai Vs. State of Gujarat; (2002)10 SCC 283 it has been observed :

¶15

“In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep the vehicles in the police station 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 application for return of the vehicles”.

¶16

In view of the settled principle, the petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate application along with relevant documents of Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No.JH14D-2109 in the court below. If the application is so filed, then the court below shall call for a verification report from the District Transport Officer and the Investigating Officer regarding genuinity and authenticity of the documents. If the report is submitted in favour of the petitioner, the court below shall release the aforesaid vehicle in favour of the petitioner after taking an indemnity bond equivalent to the value of the vehicle with two sureties of the like amount each and on furnishing of an undertaking and guarantee by the petitioner that :-

¶17

(i) he shall not alienate the vehicle by sale or transfer, till conclusion of the trial,

¶18

(ii) the custody of the vehicle shall be subject to the orders to be passed by the court on conclusion of trial,

¶19

(iii) he shall produce the vehicle before the competent authority as and when directed by court.

¶20

Before release of the vehicle, the police shall take the photographs of the vehicle and prepare a detailed panchnama .

¶21

The court below is at liberty to impose any other terms and conditions which it deems fit and proper.

¶22

5. With the said direction, the revision application is, hereby, disposed off. 6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below.

¶23

(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.)

¶24

Chandan/-

Khairullah Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khairullah Ansari 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gole Paharia Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramdev Yadav Alias Ramdeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar Alias Rajesh Kumar Raut Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Das Alias Manoj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Niraj Burma Alias Niraj Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhim Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand