ORDER

1. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. The present petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has assailed the order dated 12.7.2021 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind in CRR No.82/2021 affirming the order dated 22.6.2021 passed by the CJM, Bhind in Case No. / 2021, whereby the Tractor bearing No. M.P. 30-AB-3062 along with sand has been confiscated.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of this case are that on 13.1.2021 Town Inspector Udaybhan Singh Yadav on information of Mukhbir reached at old Railway Station, Bhind when he checked a Tractor bearing registration M.P. 30-AB-3062, it was found filled with sand. On the basis of the aforesaid an offence was registered against the petitioner at Crime No.36/2021 by Police Station- City Kotwali District Bhind (M.P.) for the offences punishable under sections 379 and 414 of IPC and section 53 of the Mines and Minerals Act and the aforesaid tractor was seized. In this regard, a case was also registered before the Collector, Bhind (M.P.) who imposed the fine of Rs. 25,000/- which has already been deposited.

4. The petitioner being a registered owner of the said tractor bearing registration No. M.P. 30-AB-3062 filed an application under sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C before the CJM, Bhind (M.P.) for releasing the aforesaid vehicle which was dismissed vide order dated 22.6.2021. Being aggrieved by the same, criminal revision was filed before the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind and the same was dismissed affirming the order of CJM, Bhind. Being aggrieved, this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle which is used for purpose of agriculture and the aforesaid vehicle is in custody of police and is lying in open sky while it requires continuous maintenance from time to time and if it is kept locked, the engine and other parts of the said vehicle will be out of order and the same will become useless for any work. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is no use of keeping the said vehicle in police custody for years till the trial is over. Trial is not likely to conclude in near future and may take long time. In such circumstances, it would be just and proper to release the said vehicle of the petitioner.

6. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposed the prayer and submitted that the orders impugned are just and proper. He further submits that no palpable error on the face of record has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in the order impugned. The said vehicle would be required during the trial for describing the nature of the property in detail, therefore, he prays for dismissal of the instant petition.

7. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties.

8. The apex Court in the case of Sundar Bhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujrat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283 has laid down the procedure for disposal of the valuable items like currency, liquor, vehicle and narcotics drugs and has held as under :-

“Powers under section 451 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely:-

1. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation.

2. Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody;

3. If the proper panchanama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the properly in detail; and

4. This jurisdiction of the Court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles.

9. On bare reading of the said dictum laid down by the apex Court, section 451 of Cr.P.C. clearly empowers the Court to pass appropriate order with