Paramjeet Kaur Bagga vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 466 Chatt

                                                         NAFR

     HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                    WPCR No. 45 of 2023

    Paramjeet Kaur Bagga W/o Hardeep Singh Bagga, aged
     about 50 years, House No. 66, Ward No. 4 Dallirajhra,
     District : Balod, (C.G.)

                                                 ---- Petitioner

                                Versus

    State of Chhattisgarh through - the Collector, Balod,
     District : Balod, Chhattisgarh

                                              ---- Respondent

For Petitioner :- Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate. For State/Respondent :- Mr. Avinash Singh, PL

DB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

Order On Board (23.01.2023)

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. Heard on admission.

2. The petition being arguable, is admitted for hearing.

3. Issue notice to the respondent.

4. Learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of the

respondent/State.

5. Since short issue is involved, with the consent of parties,

the petition is being heard and disposed off finally.

6. This petition has been filed by the petitioner against the

order of the Collector by which petitioner's application for

grant of interim custody has been rejected finding no

merit.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

petitioner's application for grant of custody has been

rejected without following the judgment of the Supreme

Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs.

State of Gujarat 1, and therefore, the order passed by the

Collector is liable to be set aside and the custody of the

vehicle may be granted to the petitioner.

8. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by

learned counsel for the petitioner.

9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties,

considered their rival submissions and perused the

records with utmost circumspection.

10. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the matter of

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) have laid down the

procedure for custody and disposal of the articles and

vehicles kept in the police custody in pending trial. Their

1 (2002) 10 SCC 283 Lordships have observed as under:-

"7. In our view, the powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely:-

1. owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation.

2. court or the police would not be required to keep the vehicle in safe custody;

3. if the proper panchanama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and

4. this jurisdiction of the court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles."

  XXX         XXX         XXX       XXX       XXX XXX
  XXX         XXX         XXX       XXX       XXX XXX

16.However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that this question of handing over the vehicle to the person from whom it is seized or to its true owner is always a matter of litigation and a lot of arguments are advanced by the persons concerned.

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 the applications for return of such vehicles.

18.In case where the vehicle is not claimed by the accused, owner, or the insurance company or by a third person, then such vehicle may be ordered to be auctioned by the court. If the said vehicle is insured with the insurance company then the insurance company be informed by the court to take possession of the vehicle which is not claimed by the owner or a third person. If the insurance company fails to take possession, the vehicles may be sold as per the direction of the court. The court would pass such order within a period of six months from the date of production of the said vehicle before the court. In any case, before handing over possession of such vehicles, appropriate photographs of the said vehicle should be taken and detailed panchnama should be prepared."

11. In that view of the aforesaid legal position, the order

passed by the Collector, Balod, is set aside and the matter

is remitted to the concerned Collector for deciding the

petitioner's application afresh in accordance with law,

keeping in view the decision rendered by the Supreme

Court in the matter of Suderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra)

within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this

order.

12. With the aforesaid observation / direction the instant writ

petition stands disposed off.

              Sd/-                                  Sd/-
        (Sanjay K. Agrawal)               (Radhakishan Agrawal)
             Judge                                 Judge

Ankit