Allahabad High Court
Abdul Kalam vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 April, 2023
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 5
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3455 of 2023
Petitioner :- Abdul Kalam
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiksha Shukla,Narendra Mohan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard Shri Narendra Mohan along-with Shri Shiksha Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter-alia with the prayer to set aside the order dated 22.03.2022 passed by the trial court namely Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Saharanpur as well as 28.10.2022 passed by the District Judge, Muzaffarnagar.
Facts in brief as contained in the present petition are that the petitioner is the owner of vehicle No. UK-17 CA-2598. The aforesaid vehicle is canter truck, the same was engaged with the respondent no.2 for transporting the goods booked by him. A first information report was lodged against the petitioner under Section 60, 63 & 72 of U.P. Excise Act read with Section 420 of IPC at Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar which was registered as Case Crime No.431 of 2020. It is stated in the aforesaid first information report that the aforesaid vehicle was checked by the police party while vehicle was passing through the road near B.B. Pur Chawki. Then it was found that the vehicle in question containing Haryana Mark Liquor, 2-3 persons sitting in the vehicle, jumped from the vehicle and ran away. It was informed to the police authorities that the owner of the vehicle is Abdul Kalam namely the present petitioner.
In this view of the matter, the vehicle in question was seized by the police authorities. An application for releasing of the vehicle has been filed by the petitioner before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, the same was rejected by him vide order dated 10.09.2020. Second application was filed by the petitioner on 28.10.2020 for the same purpose but the same was also rejected by the court below on 06.01.2021.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid order of rejection dated 06.01.2021, the petitioner filed a revision before the District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar on 06.04.2021 which was registered as Revision No.108 of 2021. The revisional court maintained the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar vide its order dated 04.12.2021.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid, an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner which was numbered as 91838 of 2022. In the aforesaid case, an order was passed by this Court on 07.06.2022 by which the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the aforesaid application. Copy of the order dated 07.06.2022 passed in the aforesaid case is appended as Annexure-7 to the present petition.
In this background of the matter, now an application was filed by the petitioner before the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Shaharanpur, Shaharanpur to release the aforesaid vehicle, the same was rejected by him vide its its order dated 22.03.2022 with the direction that if the owner/petitioner wants to release the aforesaid vehicle, first of all he should deposit penalty to the extent of Rs.11,47,500/-.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid, Civil Appeal was filed by the petitioner which was numbered as Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2022 in the court of District & Session Judge, Muzaffar Nagar, the same was rejected vide order dated 28.10.2022, hence the present petition.
It is argued that the order passed by both the courts below are illegal and liable to be set aside. It is further argued that the vehicle in question was seized without following the procedure prescribed in law. It is further argued that the vehicle in question is not involved in any criminal activity.
In view of the aforesaid, it is argued that the orders passed by the court below be set aside and the vehicle of the petitioner be directed to release.
On the other hand it is argued by the learned Standing Counsel that since the vehicle in question was involved in malpractice and since the Haryana Mark Liquor was found in the aforesaid vehicle, the same was rightly confiscated by the police authorities. It is further argued that the penalty to the extent of Rs.11,47,500/- was rightly imposed upon the petitioner.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
From perusal of the record it transpires that vehicle of the petitioner was seized in view of the fact that Haryana Mark Liquor was found in the same. The criminal proceedings in this regard is still going on. It is settled law that there is no use to keep seized vehicles at the police station for the long period. Police authorities are returned the vehicle after taking appropriate bond and guarantees as well as security for the return of the vehicle. The Supreme Court in the case of Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2003 AIR SC 638 has held that it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. Paragraph 17 of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced below:-
"17. In our view, whatever be the situation, 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 this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that there is no use to keep the seized vehicle of the petitioner at the police station. Hence the District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar is directed to pass appropriate orders immediately after taking a proper bond, guarantee as well as surety for return of the said vehicle if required at any point of time.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of finally permitting the petitioner to move an application in this regard before the District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar and if such application is filed along-with the certified copy of this order before the District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar within a period of three weeks from today, the District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar is directed to pass appropriate orders on the same, most expeditiously and positively within a period of ten days from the date of presentation of application.
It is made clear that the District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar will pass orders taking into consideration the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai (Supra) as well as the facts as narrated above in the present petition.
With the aforesaid observations, the present petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.4.2023
Swati
