Pappu Rajaram Marathe(Through ... vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 13989 Bom

Rane                       1/6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

          WRIT PETITION NO. 3291 OF 2021


Pappu Rajaram Marathe
(through Power of Attorney
Ujwala Tukaram Karande)                  .....Petitioner
     V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
and anr.                                 .....Respondents


                    ****
Mr. Nitesh J. Mohite, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. A.D. Khamkhedkar, APP for State.


               Coram : Sandeep K. Shinde, J.

Tuesday, 28th September, 2021.

P.C. :

1. Matter is palced on board today for speaking to minutes of the order dated 22nd September, 2021.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner points out that, in para-3- in the last line, "Section 357(2)" be deleted and substituted with "Section 457(2)". Same corerction is Rane 2/6

sought in the sub-para (5). In the fifth line of the sub-para, "Section 357" be substituted with "Section 457".

3. The following corrections be carried out and the order be read accordingly.

(Sandeep K. Shinde, J.) Rane 3/6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.3291 OF 2021

Pappu Rajaram Marathe (Through Power of Attorney Ujwala T. Karande) ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents ...

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/by Nitesh J. Mohite for the Petitioner.

Mr. Kamkhedkar , APP for the Respondent-State.

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 22, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2 With consent of the learned counsel for the

parties, matter is taken up for fnal hearing forthwith.

3 This Petition under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India challenges the order dated 10 th

August, 2021 vide which the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Sangli declined to deliver vehicle, to Rane 4/6

the petitioner in exercise of the powers under Section

457(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

4 Facts necessary for the decision of this

Petition are that, the petitioner is owner of, the car,

Maruti Dezire, bearing registration no.MH-12-RF-9579.

Since he is serving in the Indian Army, the car was

given in possession of his relative so that it could be

maintained regularly. This car, was allegedly used by

the accused in the Crime No.142 of 2021 registered at

Sangli City Police Station under Section 376(2)(n) of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860. Petitioner, when applied for

release of the car, trial and revisional Court, both

declined to release the car and, thus, this Petition.

According to the prosecution, accused took obscene

photos of victim in the car and threatened to make the

photos viral.

5 Under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C., a Magistrate

has three alternatives namely,

(I) he has discretion to pass any order as he thinks ftt Rane 5/6

(ii) to deliver it to the person entitled to subject to

such conditions if any, that he may imposet or,

(iii) if there is no such person, pass an order for its

custody.

. Thus, discretion conferred upon the Magistrate

under this Section is limited to selection of one of the

alternatives namelyt delivery of the property to the

person entitled thereto or disposal of the same. The

Section 457, therefore, empowers to the Magistrate to

decide the question about the person "entitled to

possess". The expression "entitled to possess" would

mean a rightful owner. In the case in hand, petitioner is

owner of the card and therefore, is a person, entitled to

possess. In the result, impugned order of the learned

Sessions Judge as well as that of the learned Magistrate

cannot be sustained. Thus, impugned orders are set

aside.

6 Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are

directed to deliver the car in question, to the power of

attorney holder of the petitioner on an Undertaking that Rane 6/6

he shall produce the car, when required and shall not

sell or transfer the car without permission of the Trial

Court. Subject to Undertaking, car shall be released

forthwith to power of attorney holder of the petitioner.

7 Petition is allowed and disposed of in

aforesaid terms.

                      8         Rule is made absolute.



                                                (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)



                      Note :     Corrections are carried out in para-3 and sub-

para(5) pursuant to speaking to minutes order dated 22nd September, 2021.

         Digitally
         signed by
         NEETA
NEETA    SHAILESH
SHAILESH SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
         2021.09.29
         14:27:28
         +0530