ORDER

24.07.2024 This matter is taken up through virtual mode.

earned counsel for the petitioner.

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order under Annexure-1 and to direct release of the seizure vehicles in her favour being the wife of late Gobinda Sahu deceased accused in connection with S.C. No.09 of 2022 arising out of Sindhikela P.S. Case No. 97 dated 13th October, 2021 registered under Sections 302/201 IPC and other allied offences further corresponding to G.R. Case No. 34 of 2021 of the file of learned JMFC, Bangomunda on the grounds stated therein.

Ms. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the rightful claimant to receive interim Page 1 of 4 Petitioner , Advocate Opposite Parties Panigrahi, ASC challenging the direct release of the the wife of late Gobinda Sahu deceased accused in connection with S.C. No.09 of 2022 arising October, 2021 her allied offences further corresponding to G.R. Case No. 34 of 2021 of the file of learned JMFC, Bangomunda on the grounds stated therein.

would submit rightful claimant to receive interim custody of the seized vehicle release it vide impugned order under Annexure legally tenable and therefore, the same is liable to be interfered with and set aside with 5. Mr. Panigrahi, learned ASC for the State would submits that he does not have a copy of the revision petition by the other side.

6. In course of hearing below in absence of the documents of the vehicles being produced by the petitioner divulged, declined to direct release of the seizure vehicles while dealing with an application Section 7. It is claimed that t the petitioner case as against submitted that court at present. As regards claimed that the documents of the vehicle custody of the court, the same having been seized vide Annexure 2 series. According to learned counsel for the petitioner no doubt or any kind the alleged vehicles shown to have been seized in connection with Sindhikela the court of learned No. 09 of 2022.

Page custody of the seized vehicles but learned court below decline release it vide impugned order under Annexure-1 which is not legally tenable and therefore, the same is liable to be interfered with and set aside with consequential directions issued.

Mr. Panigrahi, learned ASC for the State would submits that he does not have a copy of the revision petition not being served by the other side.

In course of hearing, the Court finds that learned court absence of the documents of the vehicles being produced by the petitioner and such other information since not declined to direct release of the seizure vehicles while with an application Section 457 Cr.P.C.

It is claimed that the deceased accused, namely, husband petitioner happens to be the owner of the vehicles as against him stood abated later to his death. It is further submitted that the case is pending before the learned Sessions court at present. As regards, release of the seizure vehicle claimed that the documents of the vehicles involved are in the custody of the court, the same having been seized vide Annexure ccording to learned counsel for the petitioner, there no doubt or any kind of dispute in relation to the ownership of the alleged vehicles shown to have been seized in connection with Sindhikela P.S. Case No. 97 of 2021 currently pending the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji in S.C.

No. 09 of 2022.

Page 2 of 4 but learned court below declined to which is not legally tenable and therefore, the same is liable to be interfered Mr. Panigrahi, learned ASC for the State would submits that being served the Court finds that learned court absence of the documents of the vehicles being and such other information since not declined to direct release of the seizure vehicles while husband of be the owner of the vehicles and the . It is further the case is pending before the learned