Kumar S R Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER VIDE DATED 28/06/2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE VIDE DATED 28/06/2023 PASSED IN CRL.R.P. 54/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE.A.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:12033 WP No. 18136 of 2023

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.06.2023 passed by the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Hassan in Crl.RP No.54/2023, vide Annexure-A.

¶24

Dispute is with regard to the interim custody of a tipper Lorry bearing registration No.KA-48-2533, Chassis Number MAT37313491H19290, Engine No.697TC56HQZ 112964. Petitioner as well as respondent No.2 filed separate applications for the interim custody of the vehicle, under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate by separate orders rejected both the applications. Respondent No.2 herein assailed the order dated 27.02.2023 passed by the learned Magistrate in PCR No.327/2022, rejecting his application filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. Admittedly, the order dated 21.03.2023

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12033 WP No. 18136 of 2023

¶26

passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting the application filed by the petitioner was not challenged by him before the learned Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge vide impugned order dated 28.06.2023 was pleased to allow the revision petition filed by respondent No.2 and consequently, set aside the order dated 27.02.2023 in so far as rejecting the application filed by respondent No.2 seeking interim custody of the vehicle. The interim custody was granted in his favour subject to conditions.

¶27

It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that the chassis number of the vehicle was tampered and while disposing of the revision petition filed by respondent No.2, the FSL report was not considered.

¶28

A perusal of the order passed by the revisional Court does not indicate that the FSL report was taken into consideration, since the said report was not available at that stage. Hence, it is just and necessary to consider the claim of both the parties afresh by the learned Magistrate

¶29

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12033 WP No. 18136 of 2023

¶30

and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, the following:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

(i) Petition is allowed.

¶33

(ii) The impugned order dated 28.06.2023 passed

¶34

in Crl.RP No.54/2023 by the Court of the III Additional District and Sessions Jugde at Hassan is hereby set aside. Consequently, both the orders passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting the applications filed by the petitioner as well as respondent No.2, under Section 457 of Cr.P.C., are set aside.

¶35

(iii) Both the parties are at liberty to file fresh applications before the learned Magistrate and in that event the learned Magistrate after considering the claim of both the parties shall pass necessary orders in accordance with law.

¶36

(iv) By virtue of the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, interim custody of the vehicle in question

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:12033 WP No. 18136 of 2023

¶38