The impracticality of keeping a seized vehicle idle and the right of the registered owner to release the vehicle on sapurdari were the central legal principles established in the judgment.

Judgment

Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.

The petitioner, by way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) seeks quashing of order dated 25.10.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh in CRR No. 223 of 2023, titled “Sher Mohammad Versus State of Haryana”, upholding the order dated 16.10.2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nuh, whereby an application filed at the instance of petitioner for release of vehicle (Mahindra Bolero Pickup) bearing Registration No. HR-74B-8652 (for short “the seized vehicle) on sapurdari in case FIR No. 88 dated 17.05.2023 under Sections 5/13(2) & 17 of The Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (for short “the 2015 Act”), Section 11-59-60 of Animal Cruelty Act and Sections 279 & 336 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Rozka Meo, District Mewat, was dismissed.

2. As per FIR (supra), it has been, inter alia, alleged that the petitioner–Sher Mohammad @ Sher Mohd. and his co-accused have been found to be involved in the business of cow slaughtering, while using the seized vehicle.

3. The petitioner being the owner of the seized vehicle filed an application for release thereof on sapurdari, which was dismissed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nuh vide order dated 16.10.2023. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing CRR No. 223 of 2023 which was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh, vide order dated 25.10.2023 on the ground that no Court shall have jurisdiction to release the seized vehicle due to the bar imposed by Section 17(3) of the 2015 Act. Hence, the present petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized vehicle, but the same was not involved in the occurrence; however, the same is in possession of the police since 17.05.2023, which would thus get damaged. Learned counsel while relying upon a judgment dated 14.01.2020, rendered by Co-ordinate Bench in CRM-M-14463-2019, titled “Azhar Husain Versus State of Haryana”, submitted that in the similar circumstances, the petition was accepted and the vehicle of the owner-accused was directed to be released on sapurdari.

5. Learned State Counsel has opposed the prayer made in the petition, in terms of reply filed by way of affidavit dated 12.02.2024 of Sh. Surender Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nuh, District Nuh, In the said reply at para-8 of preliminary submissions, it is stated that the petitioner is a hard core criminal and is involved in eleven (11) more cases, though acquitted in six (06) cases; however, learned State Counsel does not raise any serious objection to release the vehicle in view of order dated 14.01.2020 passed in Azhar Husain’s case (supra).

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the paper-book / relevant record, I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.

7. In the present case, the seized vehicle is lying in the police station since 17.05.2023, i.e. for the last about nine months, which may outlive its utility with the passage of time. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the seized vehicle idle in police station for a long period as the same will become junk. The offences mentioned in the FIR (supra) are triable by the Magistrate, which may take long time.

8. Moreover, the prayer made by the petitioner has been declined in terms of the provisions laid down under Section 17 of the 2015 Act and the vires thereof were assailed before this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No. 19153 of 2016, titled “Manipal Versus State of Haryana and others”, which was disposed off vide order dated 30.05.2017 and the same reads as under:-

“The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to challenge Section 17 of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (for short, “the Act”) which provides for confiscation of the v