Jharkhand High Court
Ram Kishor Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ..Opp. Party on 23 September, 2024
Author: Ratnaker Bhengra
Bench: Ratnaker Bhengra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 1232 of 2023
Ram Kishor Yadav, aged about 45 years, son of Taleshwar Prasad Yadav,
resident of village- Karma, P.O. & P.S.- Birni, District- Giridih
.. .. ..Petitioner
--VERSUS--
The State Of Jharkhand ... ..Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Adv
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, APP
04/DATED: 23-09-2024
The instant revision petition is filed against the order dated
04/07/2023 passed by the Learned Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Giridih in connection with Birni P.S. Case No. 114/2023 registered u/s
279/304A I.P.C pending in the Learned Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Giridih whereby and whereunder the Learned Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Giridih has rejected the orayer of the petitioner for release of the
seized Hywa Vehicle bearing registration no JH-11R-7794 on 04/07/2023.
2. The Prosecution case as per FIR is that the informant, alleged that
on 04.06 2023 the son of the informant went to the house of her relative in
Markodih and on the same day at 08:30 PM, the son of the informant went to
buy some goods from the nearby shop and was returning to her relatives
house but in the meantime the driver of Hywa Vehicle bearing registration no.
JH-11R-7794 by driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and moving on a
wrong side, ran over the son of the informant and thereafter he died on the
spot. It is further stated by the informant that she was informed by her relative
over phone and then she along with villagers reached at the place of
occurrence where the people of nearby villages have informed that the vehicle
was over loaded with stones and the driver was driving the vehicle rashly. On
the basis of said information the informant had lodged F.I.R. and investigation
was taken up.
3. It is stated and submitted that the vehicle was seized in connection
with Birni P S Case No. 114/2023 and since then the vehicle is lying in
Police Station Premises.
4. It is stated and submitted that the vehicle of the petitioner is kept
in open air since the institution of the F.I.R. and most probable to damage its
Parts, Tyre, Tube etc.
5. It is stated and submitted that the petitioner had filed a release
petition before the Learned Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih and
after hearing, the Learned Court below had called for a report from the
concerned Investigating Officer.
6. It is stated and submitted that the Investigating Officer has
submitted his report before the Learned Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Giridih on 26.06. 2023 vide Gyapank No. 1504/2023 without any
obejection but in spite of that the Learned Court below was not pleased to
release the vehicle of the petitioner.
7. It is stated and submitted that the Division Bench of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. The State of Gujrat, 2002
Supp(3) SCR 39 has clearly contended that 'It is of no use to keep such seized
Vehicle at the Police Station for a long period The learned counsel for the
petitioner has further submitted that in two other similar cases where the facts
are regarding release of vehicles, a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.M.P.
No. 924 of 2023 vide order dated 09.08.2023 and in Cr.M.P. No. 4187 of 2023
vide order dated 03.04.2024 released the vehicles. Counsel has referred to
paragraph no. 10 of the order passed in Cr.M.P. No. 4187 of 2023 which runs
as under.
"10. Now coming to the facts of the case, this Court has no hesitation in holding
that both the learned In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has failed to
act in accordance with Rule -6 of the Jharkhand Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal Rules, 2019 and has unnecessarily allowed the vehicle to be kept under
open sky and thereby diminishing its value. As already indicated above, Rule -6
of the Jharkhand Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Rules, 2019 mandates that if
an owner of the vehicle, even if the vehicle is involved in an accident causing
death of or bodily injury to any person or injury to any property, has no
insurance covering the third-party risks, if otherwise, the petitioner seeking the
release of the vehicle is entitled to get custody of the vehicle as per law, the
absence of the insurance policy covering the third-party risks will not be an
impediment for release of the vehicle but the rider is in such a case is that the
registered owner must be asked to furnish sufficient security to the satisfaction
of the court to pay compensation that may be awarded in any claim case arising
out of such accident. But the learned In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Giridih has not given any opportunity to the owner of the vehicle to furnish
sufficient security to the satisfaction of the court to pay the compensation
amount that may be awarded, in any claim case arising out of the accident. It is
crystal clear from the facts of the case that though the
seized vehicle allegedly involved in the accident has been seized about more
than six months, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has not taken
any steps to ensure compliance of Rule 6(2) of the Jharkhand Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal Rules, 2019, which envisages that the motor vehicle, the owner
of which fails to furnish the insurance policy covering the third-party risks, shall
be sold off in public auction by the magistrate having jurisdiction over the area
where the accident occurred."
8. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for release
of the vehicle.
9. Having heard both counsels, noted the submissions particularly the
cited judgments and also as aforesaid, the order dated 04.07.2023 passed by
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Birni P.S.
Case No. 114 of 2023, being not sustainable in law is set aside and the
petition of the petitioner for release of the Hywa Vehicle bearing Registration
No. JH-11R-7794 is allowed subject to the petitioner furnishing an
inbdemnity bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two solvent sureties undertaking to
pay the compensation to be awarded in any motor accident claims case arising
out of the said accident.
10. Accordingly, the petitioner who is the registered owner of the
Hywa Vehicle sought to be released is directed to furnish the said indeminity
bond with two solvent sureties for Rs. 2,00,000/- and also undertaking to
produce the said Hywa Vehicle as and when directed by the court in the court
of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih and upon his furnishing such
indemnity bond with two solvent sureties, the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Giridih is directed to release the Hywa Vehicle bearing
Registration No. JH-11R-7794 in favour of the petitioner upon his
undertaking to produce the vehicle as and when required by the learned trial
court or by the investigating officer of the case and any other condition that
may be imposed by the learned trial court.
11. In the result, the Cr. Revision No. 1232 of 2023 is allowed.
( Ratnaker Bhengra, J)
sharda/-
