Conditions for vehicle release under power of attorney modified for practical compliance.

ORDER

Dated this the 29^th day of October, 2024 This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ,2023 with the prayers as under:

“ to delete the condition No.1 in Annexure-

III order, allow the power of attorney holder of the R.C.owner to sign and execute documents as directed by the learned Magistrate in Annexure-III order on behalf of the petitioner and directing to the lower court to release the Hyundai car bearing registration No.KL-53-P-3745 to the power of attorney holder of the petitioner in the interest of justice.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the order impugned.

3. As per the order in CMP 1714/2024 in Crime No.1733/2023 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, one Muhammed Rafi filed a petition to release his vehicle involved in this crime alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 354A (2)(n), 376, 506 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC '). The learned Magistrate accepted the petition filed by Muhammed Rafi through his Power of Attorney Holder, who is none other than his mother, and considered his application on merits. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate ordered to release the vehicle. But at the time when the order was passed, seven conditions were imposed as under:

“1. RC owner of the vehicle shall be personally present at the time of release of the vehicle and execution of bond.

2. RC owner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum for the production of the vehicle before the court as and when he is directed to do so.

3. The Investigating Officer concerned shall prepare an inventory of the vehicle and cause to take the photographs of the vehicle at the expense of the petitioner and get the inventory and photographs signed by himself, petitioner and two independent witnesses.

4. RC owner shall also produce a CD containing photographs of the vehicle along with a certificate u/s.65B of the Indian Evidence Act from the photographer.

5. The RC owner shall not dispose or make the vehicle unidentifiable till disposal of this case.

6. He shall produce original documents pertaining to the vehicle for perusal of the court.

7. The Investigating Officer is directed to verify and make sure before the release of the vehicle that all the documents for the use of the said vehicle are valid and proper.”

4. On perusal of the above conditions, except condition Nos. 3 and 7, other conditions are to be complied by the RC owner himself. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he has been working abroad and thereby he appointed his mother as the agent by executing a Power of Attorney to do things for himself and on his behalf. Therefore, the conditions 1,2,4,5 and 6 imposed are onerous to effectuate the order and to get the vehicle released. Therefore, those conditions may be lifted authorising the Power of Attorney Holder for and on behalf of the petitioner to comply those conditions.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor could not raise any serious objection.

6. On perusal of the conditions at par with the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is discernible that the trial court accepted the Power of Attorney and proceeded with the petition filed by the Power of Attorney Holder, in the facts of the case, where the original petitioner could not appear before the court because he has been working abroad. Thus it appears that condition Nos.1,2,4,5 and 6 found to be onerous and the same in fact is akin to non-release of the vehicle on allowing the same, being subject matter of destruction by natural process.

7. In view of the above, the