Seized commercial vehicles should not be kept in custody for a long period and should be released on appropriate conditions, even during the pendency of proceedings.

Ravi Nath Verma, J.

Challenge in this revision application is to the order dated 22.09.2014 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in Bagodar P.S. Case No. 77 of 2014 whereby and where under the petition filed by the petitioner for release of his truck bearing no. CG-15A-9490 which was seized in connection with the aforesaid case, has been rejected holding that since confiscation proceeding is pending before competent authority, this court cannot release the seized vehicle.

2. Bereft of the unnecessary details, the fact which is relevant for the proper adjudication of the revision application, in short, is that after getting a secret information, the informant, S.I. Bagodar Police Station instituted the aforesaid case under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act with the allegation that three trucks bearing nos. CG-04JB-5699, CG-15A-9490 and NL-01K-7213 loaded with illegal mined coal were seized. Seeing the police party, the driver and Khalasi of the two trucks anyhow fled away but the driver and Khalasi of the truck no. CG-04JB-5699 were caught and on enquiry they failed to produce any document relating to the coal loaded on the said truck. It appears that later on confiscation proceeding was initiated by the proper authority the District Forest Officer.

3. The present petitioner filed a petition for release of the seized truck claiming himself to be the owner of the said truck and the fact that the vehicle in question is a commercial vehicle and petitioner being transporter had given the truck on hire to M/s Ujiyar Coal Traders, Dehri, Rohtas to transport the coal purchased from Aman enterprises but on way the said truck was seized by the police. The court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after hearing the parties rejected the prayer for release by order impugned as indicated above.

4. After some argument, learned counsel, Mr. Roy fairly submitted that the court has rejected the prayer merely on the ground that the confiscation proceeding is pending though in view of the mandates given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambala Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283 the vehicle in question upon being a commercial vehicle, cannot be kept in custody for a very long period. It was also submitted that the petitioner is ready to furnish sufficient security as an interim measure and direction may be given to the competent authority to release the vehicle.

5. Learned counsel representing the State opposed the prayer for release of the vehicle since the confiscation proceeding is pending before the competent authority.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambala Desai (supra) while considering the similar question for release of commercial vehicle held in Paragraph 17 as follows:

"In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations 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 applications for return of such vehicles."

7. In the instant case from the order impugned, it would appear that a confiscation proceeding has been initiated. The competent authority under the provisions of the Forest Act has every power to release the seized vehicle as an interim measure on certain conditions even during pendency of the proceeding. There appears to be no dispute with regard to the ownership of the vehicle though no document relating to the ownership of the vehicle has been filed.

8. In view of the discussions made above, this criminal revision application is allowed and the order impugned dated 22.09.2014 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in Bagodar P.S. Case No. 77 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 812 of 2014 is, hereby, set aside. The petitioner is directed to appear before the competent au