Interim custody of a confiscated vehicle is permissible when the criminal case is pending, reinforcing the principle that legal confiscation is invalid during ongoing proceedings.

1. This petition is filed under Section 528 Of B.N.S.S. 2023 /482 of the Cr.P.C against the order dated 5/5/2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, District Ratlam in Cr.R.No.40/2025 arising out of the order dated 8-4- 2025 passed by the JMFC, District Ratlam, in crime No.95/2025, whereby, the application under sections 497,503 of the B.N.S.S/ Cr.P.C for release of Truck bearing registration No.RJ-49 GA-0915 on “Supurdgi”, has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid vehicle has been seized by the police in crime no.95/2025 registered at police station Bilpank District-Ratlam under sections 4, 6,9 of M.P. Govansh Pratished Adhiniyam , 2004; Section 11 (1) (D) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act , 1960. It is alleged that the said vehicle was being used in the commission of the aforesaid offence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle and he is ready to comply with the condition imposed by this Court. It is further submitted that the cost of vehicle is approximately Rs.7,00,000/-.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO

4. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that after considering the provisions of MP Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam and Rules framed therein of 2012, the co-ordinate bench of this court in the case of Sarvan and Anr Vs. State of MP passed in M.Cr.C No.593/2015 dated 24.08.2015 held that during the pendency of the trial, the vehicle in question can be released on interim custody to the petitioner.

5. Counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to a recent decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court at Jabalpur in the case of Ramlal Jhariya Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others passed in W.P. No.11356 of 2024 and other connected petitions dated 21.04.2025, wherein the issue of confiscation of vehicle has been settled by the Full Bench, and it has been held that such confiscation is bad in law when the criminal case is still pending before the concerned Court.

6. Counsel for the State has not disputed the aforesaid legal proposition.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration to a recent decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court at Jabalpur in the case of Ramlal Jhariya (supra) and the various judgments passed by this court and in the case of Raees (supra) and Sarwan (supra), I am of the view that the present petition deserves to be allowed with the following conditions:-

"1. The petitioner shall file a copy of the registration card to establish that he is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and the trial court shall verify the same and if the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle, the same shall be released on interim custody to the petitioner on Superdagi to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned magistrate.

2. He will furnish an undertaking that he will not alienate or transfer the vehicle during the pendency of the trial or till the confiscation proceedings are completed.

3. He will not commit any crime under the provisions of MP Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004 till the matter is decided.

4. He shall not change its appearance, colour etc and he shall Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO produce the vehicle whenever is directed by the Criminal Court or by the Magistrate as the case may be."

8. Breach of the condition would entail cancellation of the interim custody automatically

9. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to allow the present petition, and accordingly, impugned orders dated 5.5.2025 and 8.4.2025 are hereby quashed, and it is directed to the respondents to release the petitioner's Truck bearing registration No.RJ-49 GA-0915 on his furnishing adequate surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

10.