Allowed

Ritanjali Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Mar 2021CRLA/721/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the Criminal Appeal and directed the release of a seized Mahindra Bolero vehicle in favour of the appellant. The impugned order rejecting the petition for release was quashed based on a letter stating the vehicle is no longer required for further investigation. The release is subject to eight conditions, including furnishing security and maintaining insurance.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 31.07.2019 rejecting the petition for release of the seized vehicle is quashed, and the vehicle is directed to be released to the appellant subject to eight specific condition

Ritanjali Behera Vs State of Odisha — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

CRLA No.721 of 2019

¶2

¶3

18.03.2021 This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶5

This Criminal Appeal under section 13 of the Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2011 (hereafter ‘O.P.I.D. Act’) has been filed by the appellant Ritanjali Behera in challenging the impugned order dated 31.07.2019 passed by the learned Special Court OPID, Balasore in Criminal Misc. Case No.02 of 2019 in rejecting her petition under section 457 of Cr.P.C. for release of Mahindra Bolero bearing Registration No.OD-09-N-3961 on the ground that the further investigation is under progress and the vehicle might be necessary for the purpose of further investigation.

¶6

As per order dated 04.03.2021 in which it is mentioned that since more than one and half years have already passed from the date of rejection of the petition under section 457 of Cr.P.C., the learned counsel for the State was asked to obtain instruction

¶7

¶8

from the investigating officer about the status of the investigation and if further investigation is still pending, whether the detention of the vehicle in question is at all necessary for the purpose of further investigation or not.

¶9

Today, the learned counsel for the State has produced a letter of the Inspector in-charge of Town police station, Keonjhar dated 17.03.2021 wherein it is mentioned that in Keonjhar Town P.S. Case No.71 of 2019, charge sheet has been submitted keeping the investigation open and the seized vehicle is not required for further investigation. The said letter is taken on record.

¶10

In view of the instruction obtained by the learned counsel for the State and after hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties and the grounds taken therein and keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambala Desai -Vrs.- State of Gujarat reported in (2003) 24 OCR (SC) 444 , the date of seizure of the vehicle and progress of further investigation, while quashing the impugned order dated 31.07.2019, I direct that the aforesaid vehicle bearing registration No.OD-09-N-3961 shall be released in favour of the appellant subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

¶12

(i) the appellant shall produce the original registration certificate, insurance papers before the concerned police station which shall be verified properly and true attested copies thereof shall be retained by the investigating officer/I.I.C. of the police station;

¶13

(ii) the appellant shall furnish property security worth of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) only;

¶14

(iii) the appellant shall keep the vehicle insured at all times till the conclusion of the trial and produce the insurance certificates before the Trial Court as and when required;

¶15

(iv) the appellant shall not change the colour or any part of the engine and chassis number of the vehicle;

¶16

(v) the appellant shall furnish two photographs of the vehicle before taking delivery of the same;

¶17

(vi) the appellant shall not transfer the ownership of the vehicle in favour of any other person;

¶18

(vii) the appellant shall produce the vehicle before the Court as and when called upon;

¶19

¶20

(viii)the appellant shall not allow the vehicle to be used in the commission of any offence.

¶21

Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of.

¶22

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶23

…………………..……

¶24

S.K. Sahoo, J.

¶25

RKM

Ritanjali Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritanjali Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhikari Mallik Vs State of Odisha

Sibaram Bauta Vs State of Odisha

Muna Putel Vs State of Odisha

Manmath@Matha Barik Vs State of Orissa

Satyabhama Dalai Vs State of Orissa

Ananda Bhuyan @ Bhian Vs State of Odisha