Back
2020 Supreme(All) 476
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
Vikas Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Respondent
Application U/s 482 No. 33012 of 2019
Decided On : 22-01-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Manvendra Narain Pathak
The main legal point established is that the rightful owner of a seized vehicle, with no dispute over ownership, should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of the property, and the court should promptly exercise the powers under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. for the proper custody and release of the property.
Headnote:
Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Order - Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272 I.P.C. and Sections 60, 63, 72 of Excise Act - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. and their application in the release of seized property. It also referred to legal precedents such as Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, Nand v. State of U.P., Jai Prakash v. State of U.P., and Kamaljeet Singh v. State of U.P. to support the release of the seized vehicle.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought to quash the order for detaining his vehicle under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272 I.P.C. and Sections 60, 63, 72 of Excise Act. He claimed that the vehicle was wrongly detained and that he was falsely implicated in the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant was the rightful owner of the seized vehicle and that keeping the vehicle detained for a long period served no useful purpose. It referred to legal provisions and precedents to support the release of the vehicle.
Issues: The issues involved the wrongful detention of the vehicle, the pendency of confiscation proceedings, and the applicant's ownership rights over the vehicle.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal provisions and precedents to establish that the applicant's ownership of the vehicle and the lack of dispute over ownership warranted the release of the seized vehicle.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application, set aside the impugned orders, and remitted the case back to the concerned Magistrate to decide the release application of the applicant afresh within a period of two months.
JUDGMENT :
1. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer for quashing the order dated 10.06.2019 passed by Incharge Judicial Magistrate, Court No.11 Deoria in Misc. Case No.171 of 2019 (State Vs. Satya Prakash Mall), arising out of Case Crime No.318 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272 I.P.C. and under Sections 60, 63, 72 of Excise Act, Police Station Rudhrapur, District Deoria.
2. Further prayer has also been made to quash the order dated 18.07.2019 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Deoria in Criminal Revision No.93 of 2019 (Vikas Kumar Vs. State of U.P.) filed against the aforesaid order of learned Incharge Judicial Magistrate, Deoria, rejecting the release application which has been confirmed by the learned revisional court.
3. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.
4. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the opposite parties and perused the record.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the registered owner of vehicle/Mahindra Scorpio bearing Chasis No. MA1TA2TDKJ2J39166 and Engine No.TDJ4J79127, in this regard sale certificate and trade certificate were issued by the agency. Thereafter, the applicant has applied for registration of the said vehicle before the Regional Transport Officer, Siwan and when the vehicle of the applicant was driven by driver, while going to Deoria for treatment of his relative, then police of Police Station Rudhrapur, District Deoria caught the vehicle and detained at Police Station Deoria without any reason. When the applicant came to know about this incident he went to police station to ensure about the incident but the vehicle of the applicant was not there and it was detained by the police to some other place keeping the vehicle in their custody.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case to extract illegal gratification from him and after the denial the police, thereafter, lodged an F.I.R. under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272 I.P.C. and under Sections 60, 63, 72 of Excise Act, Police Station Rudhrapur, District Deoria and vehicle was ceased by the police. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that the applicant was released on bail on 28.01.2019 in respect of the above incident.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has moved release application before the learned Magistrate stating therein that he is an agriculturist and was using his vehicle for personal use and when the vehicle was ceased by the police, driver of the applicant was going to Deoria for treatment of his relative and the vehicle was wrongly detained by the police. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that it was wrongly stated by the police that applicant was transporting the liqueur in the said vehicle.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the release application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Magistrate on 10.06.2019 only on the ground that the investigation was going on and the confiscation proceedings under Section 72 of U.P. Excise Act were pending before the District Magistrate, Deoria, therefore, the vehicle cannot be released. Against the order of learned Magistrate, the applicant has filed criminal revision before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Deoria bearing Case No.93 of 2019 (Vikas Vs. State of U.P.) and the learned revisional court rejected the criminal revision vide order dated 18.07.2019 on the same ground, observing that the confiscation proceedings are pending before the District Magistrate, Deoria, therefore, the vehicle in question cannot be released.
9. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the vehicle is standing in open yard in the police station since long and with the passage of time ultimately it will becom
