Interim custody of seized property under Section 451 of Cr. P.C. should be granted absent rival claims, focusing on preservation pending trial.

1. The present petition has been filed under Art.226 and Art.227 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 10.09.2020 passed in application preferred under S.451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr. P. C.) by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Songadh, District Tapi, which confirmed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tapi at Vyara by the judgment and order dated 07.11.2020 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.26 of 2020 and further seeking direction to the respondent No.2 to release / handover the interim custody of 12 Animal Buffaloes during pendency of trial.

2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are as under: -
2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased Buffaloes from one Asifbhai Rajjakbhai Multani, who is resident of Vasavad, Gondal, for his business use as the petitioner has business of animal husbandary as well as selling milk. During the transportation of animals, the police seized the Eicher Tempo bearing registration No. GJ - 33 - T - 1256 in connection with the offence registered as CR. No. 11824004200789 of 2020 before Songadh Police Station, Tapi and animals were also seized by police and sent to the Panjarapol, Kamrej.
2.2. The petitioner preferred an application under S.451 of the Cr. P. C. before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Songadh, District Tapi to get custody of animals, which came to be rejected and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner challenged the order before the Sessions Court by way of filing Criminal Revision Application No.26 of 2020, which came to be rejected confirming the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Songadh, District Tapi. Hence, the petitioner has challenged both the orders by way of filing the present petition before this Court.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Rikinkumar Patel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the animals are purchased by the petitioner for his business use of Animal Husbandary and milk selling purpose, however, during transportation, police has seized vehicle as well as the animals. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the certificate issued by Dhamane Gram Panchayat, Taluka Shindkheda, District Dhule annexed at Annexure - C and submitted that the petitioner is a farmer by profession and he had purchased the livestock for the purpose of milking. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the certificate of Shri Vasavad Gram Panchayat, Taluka Gondal, District Rajkot and submitted that in the said certificate it is mentioned that the petitioner purchased the livestock for the purpose of milking. The declaration by the original owner is also annexed, who has certified that petitioner is the owner of the livestock. He has submitted that the courts below have committed serious error in rejecting the applications preferred by the petitioner.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Rikinkumar Patel for the petitioner, in support of his submissions, has placed reliance on the orders dated 03.11.2020, 11.05.2012 and 11.10.2013 passed in Special Criminal Application No.4286 of 2020, Special Criminal Application Nos.1323 and 1324 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application Nos.1832 and 1836 of 2012, respectively, by the Co - ordinate Benches of this Court.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Nisarg Shah appearing for the respondent No.2 has vehemently submitted that the petitioner has failed to prove his ownership qua seized the animals and the courts below have rightly rejected the applications of the petitioner after considering the documents produced by the petitioner. He has referred to the various Rules of the Transportation of Ani