SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 5207

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. BADHARUDEEN, J
SREEJA V – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC 8925/2022



Advocates:
BIJU SUNDAR, S.RENOJ, PP-SRI.G.SUDHEER

Ownership rights prevail over seizure claims derived from criminal offences, provided the rightful owner asserts their claim appropriately.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure 482 - Summary of the interpretation and applications of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in relation to the release of seized property, addressing judicial discretion in light of competing legal claims concerning the ownership of property.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought the return of a motorcycle seized in a narcotics case, claiming it was stolen from him prior to its seizure. The previous order denying its release was challenged.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the vehicle belonged to the petitioner and that the conditions for its release under Section 482 were met, emphasizing the need to prevent potential destruction of the seized property.

Issues: Whether the vehicle seized under the NDPS Act can be released to the petitioner, given the circumstances surrounding its theft and subsequent seizure.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that ownership claims based on theft should be acknowledged, allowing the release of the vehicle provided certain conditions were met.

Final Decision: The court set aside the order denying the vehicle's release and directed its return under specific conditions.

ORDER

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2023 This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C’)

seeking the following prayers:

“a) allow the Petition and set aside the Annexure A1 order dated 28th day of June 2022 in Crl.M.P No:1493/2022 on the file of the Learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-I Thiruvananthapuram.

b) Necessary and effective directions may be given to the Respondents to release the said vehicle to the petitioner within a time frame as because the said vehicle is left on the roadside of the 3rd respondent's office.

c) Grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in this case for the return of the said vehicle to the petitioner.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, order in Crl.M.P. No. 1493/2022 dated 28.06.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (Additional Sessions Judge-I), Thiruvananthapuram, is liable to be quashed since as per the impugned order, the learned Special Judge, refused to release the Royal Enfield motor cycle bearing registration no. KL-22-G-5908 having Chassis No.ME3U3K5C0FA666657 and Engine No.U3K5C0FA666657 which is under custody of the 3rd respondent, since the same was seized in Crime No. 119 of 2022 of Pallickal Police Station, registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (hereinafter referred as 'NDPS Act' for convenience).

4. Precisely on the subject matter, the specific allegation is that the vehicle originally belonged to the petitioner was stolen away from the petitioner's car porch by an unknown person, between the late hours of 05-05-2021 and the early hours of 06.05.2021. It is submitted further that, immediately after knowing about the theft of the motor bike, complaint was lodged before the Kazhakuttom Police Station and based on which Crime No.1227/2021 of Kazhakuttom Police Station alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC was registered. It is submitted that, in view of the above factual aspects, the vehicle belongs to the petitioner seized in Crime No.119/2022 of Pallickal Police Station is liable to be released, negativing the bar under the provisions of the NDPS Act.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor also conceded the fact that, though the vehicle was seized with a different number while registering the crime No.119/2022, later enquiry revealed that there was alteration in the engine number and the chassis number. When the same was verified, it was found that, the engine number of the Bike as U3K5C0FA666657 and Chassis No. as ME3U3K5C0FA666657, pertaining to motor bike bearing Registration No. KL-22-G- 5908 and accordingly, another Crime No.186/2022 alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 465 and 471 of IPC , was registered against the accused in Crime No.119/2022 and the same also is under investigation. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted further that a request was made to make the Bike as an MO in the earlier theft case. 6. On perusal of the copy of RC Book produced by the petitioner, it could be gathered that, the chassis number and the engine number of the Royal Enfield motor cycle bearing registration number KL-22-G-5908 is the one which was seized in Crime No.119 of 2022 and therefore, the release as sought for by the petitioner should have been allowed by the Court, where the vehicle was produced.

7. Since the vehicle has been in custody and there is likelihood of destruction of the same, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to set aside Annexure A1 order and release the vehicle of the petitioner on the following conditions: i. The Station House Officer, Kazhakuttom Police Station is directed to prepare a Mahazar in relation to the said Motor Bike bearing registration number KL-22- G-5908 and produce th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top