Shailesh Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 9060 MP

                                    1                                CRR-3178-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                 CRR No. 3178 of 2021
                  (SHAILESH MISHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


Jabalpur, Dated : 21-12-2021
      Mr.S.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Mr.Harish Shukla, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

This criminal revision under section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant against order dated 27.9.2019 (sic. 27.09.2021) passed by 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in unregistered

Criminal Appeal UNCR/406/2019 whereby the application filed by the applicant under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in preferring appeal under section 454 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

The complainant is the owner of Gopal Goods Garage, Katni who on 05.11.2008 booked 409 bags of pulses ('Dal') weighing 195 Kg. for transportation to businessman of Rewa, namely, Narayandas through Truck bearing registration No.MP-19/D-9171 which was driven Ram Bahor Kol. When the aforesaid food stuff did not reach the complainant lodged a complaint and consequently Crime No.765/2008 was registered against the

aforesaid driver under section 406 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Kotwali, Katni.

Thereafter, the truck belonging to the applicant bearing registration No. MP-17/HH-0741 was seized by the Rewa Police under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. Subsequently, the Police in collusion with the owner of truck (MP- 19/D-9171) falsely implicated the applicant and his truck in aforesaid crime. The Police Station, Kotwali Katni after investigation filed charge sheet against the applicant and his driver (Anil Tripathi). They were tried and vide judgment dated 17.3.2016 the applicant has been acquitted but since his driver was absconding, therefore no decision with regard to seized property being truck (MP-17/HH-0741) could be taken.

The applicant challenged the aforesaid decision dated 17.3.2016 before the Sessions Judge, Katni in appeal under section 454 Cr.P.C. alongwith an 2 CRR-3178-2021 application under section 5 of the Limitation Act. By impugned order the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Katni dismissed with application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act by observing that appeal has been preferred after a lapse of 3 years, 08 months and 16 days which is inordinate one. Consequently, the appeal stood dismissed.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is registered owner of the vehicle. The learned court below while passing the judgment dated 17.3.2016 had observed that though applicant is acquitted but since another accused-driver (Anil Tripathi) is absconding, therefore, no decision is taken on seized truck. The court below ought to have taken into consideration that applicant was under belief that whenever absconding accused will appear before the Court then decision in respect of seized vehicle would be taken. It ought to have been taken into consideration that co-accused was still absconding, therefore, the applicant filed an appeal alongwith application for condonation of delay as his vehicle cannot be kept under seizure for indefinite period.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the revision and submitted that impugned order is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case; no useful purpose would be served if the seized vehicle is kept under custody for indefinite period; the value of the vehicle will deteriorate day-by-day; the applicant is in possession of documents relating to ownership of his seized vehicle; settled principle of law that courts should take liberal view in the matter of condonation of delay; the revision is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The delay in preferring the appeal under section 454 Cr.P.C. is condoned.

Accordingly, the learned lower appellate Court is directed to decide the appeal preferred by the applicant under section 454 of Cr.P.C. on its merits within a period of 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

                                                                       3                              CRR-3178-2021
                                          In the result, the revision stands disposed of.


                                                                                            (SMT. ANJULI PALO)
                                                                                                  JUDGE

                                     RM




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by RAJESH MAMTANI
Date: 2021.12.22 18:13:52 IST