Hare Krishna Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Hare Krishna Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None substantive; the writ petition was dismissed with liberty alone reserved to the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedy and in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ court can direct release of the petitioner's truck (Registration No.UP-65BT-8611) in his favour in the light of the order passed by the Court of the learned C.J.M., East Champaran at Motihari on 27.04.2024 on his petition in Chhatauni P.S. Case No.428 of 2023. +2 more

Court's answer

The petitioner has another remedy and must avail himself of it, in the light of the fact that the offence is for the theft of the vehicle.

Ratio / Principle

The Writ Court cannot issue any direction or set aside the judicial order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.

Key takeaways

The vehicle had earlier been involved in an excise offence case in which it was not seized; consequently, the theft-of-the-vehicle case has no connection with the excise offence case of the year 2019.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Oral Judgment, P. B. Bajanthri, J.; Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.), CWJC No.17480 of 2024, decided 28-11-2024: Hare Krishna Yadav prayed for release of his truck (Regn. No.UP-65BT-8611) in the light of the order dated 27.04.2024 passed by the Court of the learned C.J.M., East Champaran at Motihari on his petition in Chhatauni P.S. Case No.428 of 2023 (theft of the vehicle). Held: the Writ Court cannot issue any direction or set aside the judicial order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate; the petitioner has other remedy which he must avail, the offence being theft of the vehicle; further, the vehicle's earlier involvement in an excise offence case of 2019 - in which it was not seized - leaves the theft case having no connection with the excise offence case. The instant writ petition stands dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17480 of 2024

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

Hare Krishna Yadav, S/o Late Saryug Yadav, Resident of village-Madhopur, P.O. Chainwa, P.S.-Rasulpur, District-Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Excise, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

The District Magistrate- cum- Collector, East Champaran, Motihari.

The Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari.

The District Magistrate- cum- Collector, Saran at Chhapra.

The Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chhapra.

The District Transport Officer, Saran at Chhapra.

Chunnu Kumar, Son of Nand Kishore Ray, Resident of Village-Amar Chhatauni, Police Station-Chhatauni, District-East Champaran.

... ... Respondents.

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Kumar Alok, SC-7.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)

Date : 28-11-2024

In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):

“(I). To release the vehicle (Truck) vide Registration No.UP-65BT-8611, Engine No.21G84063295, Chassis No.MAT448035C5G12097 in favour of petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Court of Learned C.J.M. East Champaran at Motihari on 27.04.2024 on the petition of

Patna High Court CWJC No.17480 of 2024 dt.28-11-2024 2/2

petitioner in Chhatauni P.S. Case No.428 of 2023. (II). Any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled for.”

2. Writ Court cannot issue any direction or set aside the judicial order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari. The petitioner has other remedy and he has to avail the same in the light of the fact that the offence is for the theft of the vehicle.

3. No doubt, earlier the vehicle was involved in excise offence and in excise offence case, the vehicle was not seized. Therefore, with reference to theft of the vehicle case has no connection with the excise offence case in the year 2019.

4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedy and in accordance with law.

( Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

P.S./-

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	29.11.2024.
Transmission Date	NA