Kankanala Chowdeswara Rao ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 5431 AP

                                    1




      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO


         CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.733 OF 2023

ORDER:-

      The Criminal Revision Case, under Section 397 & 401 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioner/A.1

seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 295 of 2023 in

Crime No 494 of 2022 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada

City, NTR District, registered for the offence under Sections 302

read with 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SCs and STs (PoA) Act,

1989 on the file of the Special Judge for trail of SCs AND STs POA

Act   cases-cum-III    Additional       District   Judge   Vijayawada,

dated 09.06.2023 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to

release the vehicle i.e., i20 white colour second hand Car bearing

registration No AP37DP4872.

2) Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

counsel for the respondents.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is the registered owner of the vehicle i.e., i20 white colour second

hand car bearing registration No.AP37DP4872 and the vehicle is

being used for personal usage of the petitioner.

4) The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor reported no objection.

5)        Perused the material on record.

6)        A perusal of record reveals that the i20 white colour second

hand car bearing registration No.AP37DP48 was directly involved in

the commission of above crime, registered under Sections 302 read

with 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SCs and STs (PoA) Act, 1989.

The petitioner purchased the said vehicle by obtaining loan of

Rs.7,00,000/- on 18.08.2020 from ICICI Bank Ltd., Vijayawada by

hypothecating the vehicle to ICICI Bank Ltd., and has been paying

the installments and further submitted that the learned District

Judge ought to have considered the submission of the petitioner

that he is prepared to furnish sufficient surety or security, for

release of the vehicle in the above crime the Police said to have

seized the vehicle under the cover of Mediators Report.

7) In the landmark judgment in a case between SUNDER BHAI

AMBALAL DESAI vs. STATE OF GUJARAT,1 the Hon'ble Supreme

Court observed that there will be no use to keep the seized vehicles

AIR 2003 (SC) 638

at the Police stations for the long period and the Hon'ble Supreme

Court directed the Courts to exercise the powers under Section 451

Cr.PC. expeditiously and judiciously and interest interim custody of

vehicles seized to the owner of the property or the person who is

entitled to be in possession of property and the owner of the

property would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its

misappropriation. If Proper Panchanama before handing over the

possession of the article is prepared, that can be used in evidence

instead of its production of article before the Court during trial.

8) In the case of Sundaram Finance Limited Vs. The State

of Tamil Nadu2, observed as follows:

"This Court is of the firm opinion that return of vehicles and permission for sale thereof should be the general norm rather than the exception it is today. None gain when the mere shell or the remnants of the vehicle are returned to the person entitled thereto, after completion of the trial. It would be no surprise to find that several vehicles have not been so much as claimed after completion of trial, because of the worthless state they have been reduced to".

2011 (1) MWN (Criminal) 437

9) In a decision reported in Gurbinder Singh @ Shinder Vs.

State of Punjab in C.R.R.No.1765/ 2015 dated 19.09.2016

wherein it is observed at Para -13 it is observed that:

"A vehicle used for committing rape and murder is being released in the grab of Section 451 Cr.P.C., as interpreted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case. When the vehicle seized in such heinous crimes released for interim custody there is no logic in denying interim custody of the vehicle seized under the N.D.P.S. Act.... It is further observed that "it is open secret that when the vehicle is parked unattended, the valuable parts of the vehicle are casually taken away or stolen.... In other words, nobody is going to be benefited out of idle parking of vehicle totally unattended in the premises of the Police Station".

10) There is nothing on record to suggest that such procedure

has followed in this case. Even as per the case of the prosecution,

on 11.02.2022 at about 10.00 hrs., i20 white colour second hand

Car bearing registration No AP37DP4872. Thus, it is clear that the

vehicle is kept idle for more than ten months period without giving

an opportunity to the registered owner of the vehicle at Police

Station itself.

11) If the vehicle is kept idle, it will get damaged, ruined and

rusted and not only that but it will also ultimately become unsalable

and unserviceable. Since the vehicle has been in the custody of

police from the date of its seizure and as the police did not require

the vehicle for any further investigation, therefore no beneficial

purpose would be served by keeping the vehicle in the custody of

police or Court. The fact of Registration is only relevant for enquiry

into the title of the vehicle and consequent possession.

12) However, the interest of the prosecution to produce the

property can be more than sufficiently protected by putting some

terms and conditions as a condition precedent for delivery of the

vehicle to the custody of the petitioner.

13) Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed, setting

aside the impugned order to the extent of refusing to grant interim

custody of the vehicle. This Court feels that it would be appropriate

that interim custody of the vehicle be granted to the petitioner.

Accordingly, interim custody of the vehicle is granted to the

petitioner on the following conditions.

a) The Interim Custody of Mahindra i20 white colour second hand Car bearing registration No AP37DP4872, is ordered to be entrusted to the Petitioner till the disposal of the case, on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) with one surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

b) Petitioner shall produce before Investigation Officer the original Registration Certificate in respect of the vehicle i.e., Mahindra i20 white colour Car bearing registration No AP37DP4872 at the time of release of the vehicle and on being satisfied regarding the authenticity and ownership of property and also on the letter of authority said to be given to Kanakala Chowdeswara Rao @ Chowdesh, S/o Vengayya, authorizing him to get custody of vehicle and the Investigation Officer is directed to return of the vehicle subject to compliance of other conditions and authorization;

c) Petitioner or the owner of the vehicle shall not alter, alienate or encumber in any manner, the said Car till the disposal of the case and to that effect both the owner and the petitioner who is the authorized person of the owner shall give undertaking affidavits before the Investigation Officer;

d) Petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the Court, without altering the colour or other features of Car

without permission of the Court, except carrying out necessary repairs;

e) Petitioner shall not use Car for any illegal/unlawful purpose after taking delivery by him;

f) At the expenses of Petitioner, the Photographs of Car shall be taken to keep them in record; and

g) The Investigation Officer is directed to prepare Panchanama at the time of delivery of Car to Petitioner in the presence of mediators and submit the bonds, photographs of the vehicle, Panchanama and undertaking affidavits before this Court to keep them in the record.

14) As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any,

pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO 10.11.2023.

Vnb

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

CRL.R.C.No.733 of 2023

10.11.2023

Vnb