Allahabad High Court
Prakash Sahu vs State Of U.P. on 14 May, 2014
Bench: Kalimullah Khan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 831 of 2009
Revisionist :- Prakash Sahu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Revisionist :- S.K. Sharma,K.K.Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Kalimullah Khan,J.
This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been directed by Prakash Sahu revisionist challenging the correctness, legality and propriety of order dated 21.1.2009 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No. 401 of 2008, Prakash Sahu vs. State of U.P., in case crime no. 659 of 2008 under Section 18/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar, whereby the aforesaid Sessions Judge has rejected the application made by owner revisionist to release his Tata Safari vehicle no.- U.P.-40 F- 4711 DICORLX, engine no.- DICOR 06 ASZ - 809618 Chechis No.- 403063 ASZ No.- 01951 in his favour.
Taken up in the revised list but none turned up for the revisionist to press the criminal revision on the point of admission. Criminal revision cannot be dismissed in default. It must be decided on merit. Therefore, heard learned A.G.A. and perused the materials available including impugned order dated 21.1.2009.
It appears that the aforesaid Tata Safari is in the ownership of applicant revisionist. It was driven by its driver. 950 gm of Charas was recovered from this vehicle. It was kept in a white dim polythene in the cavity lying under the folded hand-rest existing in between the two seats in the vehicle.
The release application was rejected by the learned trial court on the ground that applicant/ owner has not been able to convince the court that the aforesaid narcotics was carried in his vehicle without his knowledge.
The chick report drawn in this case shows that the applicant is not an accused in the aforesaid case rather one Vikas Sonkar found sitting on the driving seat at the time of search of the vehicle and recovery of the Charas. That by itself suggests that the complicity of the applicant/ revisionist in the aforesaid crime is not alleged and that is why he has not been made co-accused.
In Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2003 SC 638 Hon'ble Apex Court laid down the guidelines for the release of vehicles, valuable articles and currency notes and held that the court may follow the procedure provided under Section 451 Cr.P.C. (or 457 Cr.P.C.) while releasing the vehicle in favour of the person entitled to possession thereof. The bond and security should be taken so as to prevent the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. The court should see that photographs of such articles are attested or countersigned by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Still however, it would be the function of the Court to impose any other appropriate condition.
The Hon'ble Apex Court further held that it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.
In view of the aforesaid guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the aforesaid vehicle Tata Safari No.- U.P.-40 F- 4711 DICORLX deserves to be released in favour of the revisionist who is undisputedly its owner. The impugned order dated 21.1.2009 is illegal, incorrect and improper.
In the results, impugned order dated 21.1.2009 is set aside
Learned trial court is directed to decide the release application made by applicant/ revisionist afresh according to the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Apex Court as noted in the body of the judgment within a period of 20 days from the receipt of the order by the trail court.
Applicant may appear before the learned trial court on 9th June, 2014 and he may file certified copy of this judgment before the learned trail court for ready reference.
Criminal revision stands disposed of accordingly at admission stage itself.
Order Date :- 14.5.2014
Atmesh
