1. Heard Sri C.K. Parekh, learned counsel for revisionists and learned A.G.A. for State-respondent.

2. This criminal revision under Section 401 read with Section 397 Cr.P.C. has been filed aggrieved by order dated 18.07.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad in Case No. 2138 of 2005 rejecting the application of revisionist for release of Vehicle No. UA 04C 1478.

3. Facts, in brief, are that a First Information Report was lodged by Dr. N. Verma, Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Farrukhabad on 21.10.2005 stating therein that on 01.10.05 at 7:50 O'clock, he, along with Police Constable Shri Suresh Sharma (Supervisor) and Police Constable Shri Vivek Dwivedi and Prahari Constable Shri Indrapal Singh, in a Government Vehicle No. UP 30L 6256, was carrying out checking at the distance of 50 yards from Central Jail Outpost when driver of vehicle, DCM, bearing no. UA 04C 1478, on being signalled by him to halt, stopped the vehicle and fled away. Vehicle was loaded with vardaana (cattle) and around 21 cows and a she-calf tethered with ropes were seen sitting there. Driver fled away and vaardana in the vehicle appeared to be utterly miserable. Besides driver, there were 3-4 other persons in the vehicle. Seeing complainant and Prahari Constables, miscreants jumped off the vehicle and fled towards the field as soon as vehicle stopped. They did not stop on being called and could not be apprehended even after being given a chase. All these persons were taking these 21 cows, over the middle age, feeble and miserable by appearance, for illegal slaughtering. All the cows were de-boarded from DCM with the help of public; and leaving these cows to the care and protection of Central Jail Outpost's Sub-Inspector Shri Vijay Singh Pundeer, Constable Shri Surendra Singh and Prahari Constable Shri Vivek Dwivedi, and leaving the aforesaid DCM under the watch of the above mentioned Constable on the campus of Central Jail Outpost where other challaned vehicles are also parked, informant came to Police Station and submitted tehrir whereupon First Information Report was registered vide Crime No. 2183 of 2005 under Section 3, 5, 8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1955”) against 3-4 unnamed persons.

4. Thereafter Revisionist, Magma Leasing Limited, submitted an application for release of vehicle DCM UA 04C/1478, claiming itself to be owner of the Vehicle on the basis of being Financier.

5. Magistrate found that as per report of concerned Police Station, despite action under Section 82 Cr.P.C., neither accused have surrendered nor have been arrested. Applicant, Finance Company, had lent loan to Mohd. Naeem, son of Mohd. Yasin. Hence, registered owner will only be Mohd. Naeem. Merely on the basis of advancement of loan, applicant cannot claim to be owner of vehicle. In these circumstances, Magistrate found that release of vehicle in favour of Revisionist is not in interest of justice, and has, accordingly, rejected application. Being aggrieved, Revisionist has filed present revision.

6. Sri Parekh, learned counsel for Revisionists, submitted that Magistrate has erred in law by treating Mohd. Naeem as owner of vehicle though Revisionists, being Financier, are the owner of vehicle, and, therefore, the same must have been released to Revisionists.

7. Copy of the Vehicle Loan cum-Hypothecation Agreement, dated 30.06.2005, has been placed on record and Condition No. (B)

Clause-7 clearly states as under:

"7. Subject to the fulfillment of the terms and conditions contained herein, the ownership/title on the Vehicle(s) belong/shall belong to the Borrower/s solely and absolutely and is/shall be free from any and all charges and encumbrances save and except that created hereunder in favour of the Lender."

(Emphasis added)

8. Under other conditions of agreement, I find that there is Clause D (1), (2), (3) which reads as under:

"(D) TERMS OF HYPOTHECATION

1. The Borrower/s hereby hypothecates the Vehicle(s) in