Lakhan @ Laakhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3381 MP

                               - : 1 :-




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                              BEFORE
                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA

                     ON THE 10th OF MARCH, 2022

                 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 266 of 2022

     Between:-
     LAKHAN @ LAAKHAN S/O SHRI SHANKAR JI PARMAR, AGED
     ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE, R/O- KHATIK MOHALLA
     BADI GWALTOLI NEAR PULIA P.S. TILAK NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA
     PRADESH)
                                                          .....APPLICANT
     (BY SHRI ASHAY JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.)

     AND

   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER
1.
   THROUGH POLICE STATION KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
   JITENDRA @ JEETU S/O SHRI SHANKAR JI PARMAR , AGED ABOUT
   24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE KHATIK MOHALLA, BADI
2.
   GWALTOKI, NEAR PULIA, INDORE. POLICE STATION: TILAK NAGAR
   INDORE, (MADHYA PRADESH)
   KAPIL S/O SHRI BALIRAM JI PANWAR , AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
3. VILLAGE    DONGARGAON,     KHARGONE.     POLICE   STATION:
   MAINGAON, KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
   PANKAJ S/O SHRI VIKRAM SINGH JI THAKUR , AGED ABOUT 25
4. YEARS, CHAUHAN NAGAR, NEAR WORLD CUP SQUARE, INDORE.
   POLICE STATION: TILAK NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
     (BY SHRI MUKESH SHARMA, LEARNED GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR THE
     RESPONDENT/STATE.)

                             ORDER

The applicant has filed the present revision under Section 397 r/w section 401 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 26.08.2020 whereby the Special Judge, (NDPS) Paschim Nimar Mandleshwar, District-Khargone (M.P.), has rejected the application under Section 451 Cr.P.C.

2. As per prosecution story, on 06.12.2019, police received secret information which was recorded in the Rojnamcha and team reached to the spot alongwith panch witnesses. The motorcycle bearing Registration No. MP-09-VB-7825 was

- : 2 :-

coming as disclosed by the informant in which three person were sitting. They were apprehended and disclosed their name as Jitendra @ Jeetu, Kapil and Pankaj. After compliance of provision of NDPS Act. They were searched and from their possession 8 KG Ganja were recovered.

3. The applicant being owner of the vehicle in question has filed an application under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. for interim custody of the vehicle, which has been rejected vide order dated 26.08.2020 as custody of the vehicle is required looking to the gravity of the offence, hence, present revision before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while praying for interim custody of the subject vehicle submits that the applicant is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and therefore, he is entitled for interim custody of the vehicle. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment rendered in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, to contend that the Supreme court has held that the vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked in the police station as same shall gather rust and shall not remain useful. He has also placed reliance on order passed by this Court in the case of Nirmal Singh V/s. State of M.P. (CRR No.4669/2019 decided on 17.12.2019) in which, in the similar facts and circumstances, this Court has directed to release the vehicle on 'Supurdiginama'.

5. Per contra, learned Govt. Advocate opposes the revision and prays its rejection.

6. U/s. 60 of the NDPS Act, the vehicle involved in the offence under the NDPS Act is liable to be confiscated. U/s. 63, in the trial of offences under this Act, whether the accused is convicted or acquitted or discharged, the Court shall decide whether any article or thing seized under this Act is liable to confiscation u/s. 60 or

- : 3 :-

Section 61 or Section 62 of the Act. Therefore, the proceedings of confiscation is liable to be initiated after conclusion of the trial as per discretion of the Court. The applicant is a registered owner of the vehicle as per the prosecution story, therefore, the said vehicle can be released to him during pendency of the trial.

7. It is also settled legal proposition of law that interim custody of the vehicle cannot be denied on the ground that it is liable to be confiscated, in case the offence is proved against the accused.

8. Keeping in mind the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), there is no reason to deny interim custody of the vehicle to the owner or person entitled to get possession of the vehicle. If the vehicle is allowed to be kept in the police station for an indefinite period, then value of the vehicle shall be diminished substantially and it may not remain in usable condition. In the above circumstances, the prayer of the applicant deserves to be allowed.

9. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.08.2020 passed by learned trial court is set aside and motorcycle bearing registration No. MP-09- V.B.7825 is ordered to be released on 'supurdaginama' in favour of the applicant till completion of the trial on the following conditions:-

(a) the applicant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court undertaking to produce the vehicle aforesaid in the Court as and when required to do so.

(b) the applicant shall get the vehicle aforesaid photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken

- : 4 :-

in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the case.

(c) the applicant shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle aforesaid and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

(e) the applicant will not allow the vehicle aforesaid to be used for any antisocial activities including for the purpose of carrying narcotics which may constitute offence under the NDPS, Act.

(f) before releasing the vehicle the trial court shall verify the original documents of the vehicle.

10. The applicant has unnecessary filed the entire challan as well as two to three set of criminal revision as an advance process fees which is not required. Let the extra set be returned to the petitioner Certified copy as per Rules.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE Ajit/-

AJIT Digitally signed by AJIT KAMALASANAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,

KAMALASA 2.5.4.20=156c9cedca1b74d671db9f220a5e3ed6c ba241effad892107d95ef0a1afc55b4, pseudonym=CFDFD9C36711CA738F527A5D61A1 EE901C09EF29,

NAN serialNumber=7F0BEE2D78BD57DA058F3247441 C87E7E0817FB61F5E2ABCAEE63CAAA7B3B9FF, cn=AJIT KAMALASANAN Date: 2022.03.10 19:06:06 +05'30'