S.N. Aggarwal, J.

1. A batch of these forty-three petitions is proposed to be disposed of by this common order because they all raise the same legal question for consideration and answer by the Court and that question is whether the Magistrate has power under Sections 451 or 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to grant interim release of the vehicle seized by the authorities either under the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 or under the Wild Life ( Protection ) Act, 1972 or under the Forest Act.

2. I would like to note that some of these petitions have been filed by the owners of the offending vehicles aggrieved by refusal of interim release of their vehicles by the Magistrate on the ground that he has no power or jurisdiction to grant interim release and some petitions have been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh aggrieved by the orders of the Magistrate/Revisional Court granting interim release of the offending vehicle to its owners on supurdari subject to certain conditions mentioned in the orders.

3. Whether the petitions have been filed by the vehicle owners or by the State raise only one question regarding competence of the Magistrate to grant interim release of vehicle to