Allowed

Hareram Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC15 Apr 2019CWJC/20249/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking provisional release of a seized motorcycle. The court directed the petitioner to furnish ownership documents, two sureties, and specific undertakings regarding future conduct and production of the vehicle to the confiscating authority within 14 days.

What did the court decide?

Directs the vehicle be released provisionally upon production of ownership, registration, two sureties, and submission of required affidavits/undertakings within 14 days.

Hareram Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20249 of 2018

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Hareram Yadav, S/o Late Narayan Yadav, Resident of Village- Ranko, P.S.Khagaria (Muffasil), District- Khagaria.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Biahr Excise Department, Patna.

¶7

The Divisional Commissioner, Munger Division at Munger.

¶8

The Collector, District Khagaria at Khagaria.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, District- Khagaria at Khagaria.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar- SC11 ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)

¶13

Date : 15-04-2019

¶14

None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State is present.

¶15

The prayer is for provisional release of the Honda Livo Motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR-34K 5536, Chasis No. ME4JC714HGT032485, Engine No. JC 71ET-0258661, which has been seized in connection with Khagaria (Chitragupta Nagar) P.S. Case No. 259 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶16

It is stated by learned counsel for the State that

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.20249 of 2018 dt.15-04-2019 2/3

¶18

confiscation proceeding is yet to be initiated but the seizure list reflects the seizure of 1.5 liters of IMFL.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the State and taking note of the nature of seizure made as well as the fact that the confiscation proceeding is yet to be initiated, we direct that the vehicle in question be released provisionally in favour of the petitioner on production of ownership and registration with respect to vehicle in question in his name before the designated Court below with two sureties to the extent of the value of the vehicle as indicated in the insurance document. The petitioner while submitting the sureties shall also furnish the following affidavits/undertakings:

¶20

(i) That the vehicle in question has never been involved in any offence of similar nature in past and shall not indulge in similar offence in future.

¶21

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in creating any third party right or interest in respect of the vehicle during the pendency of the confiscation proceeding, if any, and shall not alienate the vehicle during this period.

¶22

(iii) The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking to produce the vehicle before the confiscating authority as and

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.20249 of 2018 dt.15-04-2019 3/3

¶24

when required.

¶25

(iv) Prior to release of the vehicle, a Panchanama would be got prepared by the designated Court below wherein the photograph of the vehicle shall be taken and will be certified by the petitioner and the same shall be kept on record so that in future, if so required, it may be used as a secondary evidence. The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking not to challenge the said Panchanama in course of trial.

¶26

The release shall be allowed within a period of 14 days from the date of submission of the sureties and the undertakings as stated above. This release would, however, be subject to initiation and finalization of the confiscation proceeding.

¶27

With the observations/directions above, this writ petition is allowed.

¶28

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶29

( Arvind Srivastava, J)

¶30

Nasimul/Shailendra

¶31

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	24-04-2019
Transmission Date	N/A

Hareram Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hareram Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Shankar kumar Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Bandana Devi Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Prabeen Kumar @ Munna Singh Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Pintu Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shankar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shashi Kant Tiwari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.