Jakir Through Its Power Of Attorney ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15781 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Jakir Through Its Power Of Attorney ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024

Author: Subodh Abhyankar

Bench: Subodh Abhyankar

                                                              1
                           IN     THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
                                                   ON THE 28 th OF MAY, 2024
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 29983 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          JAKIR THROUGH ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY SALMAN
                          ALI S/O MEHBOOB ALI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
                          SARANGPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI HARSHWARDHAN PATHAK, ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                          OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION SARANGPUR
                          DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI MUKESH SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR THE STATE )

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

1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C against the order

dated 30.06.2023 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Rajgarh, District Rajgarh in Cr.R.No.74/2023 arising out of the order dated 06.05.2023 passed by CJM, in crime No.131/2023, whereby, the application under sections 451 & 457 of the Cr.P.C for custody of vehicle Bolero Pick-up bearing registration no. M.P.34. G.A. 1187 is rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid vehicle has been seized by the police in crime no.131/2023 registered at police station

Sarangpur, District-Rajgarh under sections 4,6,9 of Govansh Pratished

Adhiniyam, 2004; Section 11 (1) (D) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915. It is alleged that the said vehicle was being used in the commission of the aforesaid offence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle and he is ready to comply with the condition imposed by this Court. It is further submitted that the cost of vehicle is approximately Rs.7,00,000/-.

4. It is further submitted that the law relating to release of the vehicle on interim custody in respect of the similar case has already been decided in various judgments. To bolster his submissions, he placed reliance on the

judgment passed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in the case o f Raees Vs. State of MP reported in 2013(5) MPHT 233, in which it is held that while confiscation proceedings was going on, the vehicle can be handed over on interim custody under section 451 of the Cr.P.C. He further places reliance on the judgment passed by the Apex Court of full bench of this Court in Madhukar Rao Vs. State of MP reported in 2000(1) JLJ 304 and also the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of State of MP and Ors Vs. Madhukar Rao reported in 2008(1) JLJ 427, wherein it has been held that when the trial court did not find the accused guilty of alleged offence under the Act, the confiscation of the property is not possible.

5. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that after considering the provisions of MP Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam and Rules framed therein of 2012, the co-ordinate bench of this court in the case of Sarvan and Anr Vs. State of MP passed in M.Cr.C No.593/2015 dated 24.08.2015 held that during the pendency of the trial, the vehicle in question can be released on

interim custody to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State on the other hand, has opposed the prayer.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the various judgments passed by this court and in the case of Raees (supra) and Sarwan (supra), I am of the view that the present petition deserves to be allowed with the following conditions:-

1. The petitioner shall file a copy of the registration card to establish that he is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and the trial court shall verify the same and if the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle, the same shall be released on interim custody to the petitioner on Superdagi to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned magistrate.

2. He will furnish an undertaking that he will not alienate or transfer the vehicle during the pendency of the trial or till the confiscation proceedings are completed.

3. He will not commit any crime under the provisions of MP Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004 till the matter is decided.

4. He shall not change its appearance, colour etc and he shall produce the vehicle whenever is directed by the Criminal Court or by the Magistrate as the case may be.

7. Breach of the condition would entails cancellation of the interim custody automatically.

8. With the aforesaid observation and direction the present petition stands disposed of.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE moni