Vikas Shivhare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14491 MP

                                   1
 IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        AT GWALIOR
                         BEFORE
    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY
                   ON THE 4 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
               MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 53655 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
VIKAS SHIVHARE S/O SHRI BRAJMOHAN SHIVHARE,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SHOPKEEPER,
R/O CHITERA OIL, MADHOGANJ, LASHKAR, DISTRICT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                 .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI VIVEK JAIN - ADVOCATE )

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION MADHOGANJ, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)

                                                               .....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI NIRMAL KUMAR SHARMA - PP )

      This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                     ORDER

This petition under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed against the order dated 22/6/2022 passed by the Additional Excise Commissioner, Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No.R.E.C.158/2021-22 by which the order dated 15/9/2021 passed by the District Magistrate, Gwalior for release of the vehicle on interim custody has been rejected.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized vehicle bearing No.MP07CA9302 and has no relation with the alleged offence. In support of his version, the registration certificate of the

vehicle has been produced for perusal of this Court whereby petitioner is shown as the registered owner of the seized vehicle. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle has been seized by the Collector and the application for release of the vehicle on supardiginama has been rejected vide impugned order dated 15/9/2021 on the ground that if the vehicle is released, then that may be used for repeated offence. Hence, prayed to release the vehicle on interim custody. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that order passed by learned Courts below is illegal because under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. for protection of the vehicle, it ought to have been given to the petitioner on Supurdgi who has deposited the tax etc. for

running of the vehicle. In this regard, he has cited the judgment of this Court in the matter of Yadwinder Singh Vs. State of M.P. and others, 2011 (4) MPLJ 165, in which it has been held that under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. interim custody of the vehicle should have been given to the petitioner as there was danger of its being damaged by vagaries of weather. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283 and Full Bench decision of this Court in the matter of Madhukar Rao Vs. State of M.P. and Ors, 2000 (1) MPLJ 289 in support of his contentions.

Learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the same and has submitted that the vehicle in question has been seized under Section 34 (2) of Excise Act and it is apparent from the record that the vehicle was used for transporting around 54 bulk litres of illegal liquor. Hence, prayed to reject the petition.

Perused the materials available on record.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and in light of the decision of Apex Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), the petition is allowed and the orders passed by authorities below are hereby set aside and seized vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No. MP07CA9302 (Maruti Car) is directed to be released to the petitioner on supurdgi with a direction that petitioner shall furnish a bank guarantee of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rs. Three Lacs only) to the satisfaction of the trial Court for production of the same as and when required and also on the necessary terms and conditions which may be imposed by the trial Court in this regard. The petitioner shall also be obliged to furnish an undertaking before the trial Court to the effect that he shall not change the nature of the vehicle as well as he shall not alienate the same.

The petition is accordingly disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY) JUDGE JPS/-

JAI Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR,

PRAKASH postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf179ce c865c7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb05b9522a, pseudonym=560BC50AD082B9BE54EE290EC 8CB2193780D8357,

SOLANKI serialNumber=8D6BC1C9FCE36623D0BD6B8 072A2D8C01433EBD48AE4F609F108CA8F8D E6B522, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2023.09.05 09:55:20 +05'30'