Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hari Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:21463
1 MCRC-26260-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 11th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 26260 of 2025
HARI SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Dinesh Singh Tomar - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri V P S Tomar - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
The present petition under section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing of the order dated 02.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, S.C.ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Morena, in M.J.C.R.366/2025, whereby an
application under Section 503 of BNSS filed by the petitioner for release of
his vehicle/tractor bearing registration No.MP07-30-0045 has been
dismissed.
2. The facts in brief to decide this petition complainant Narendra
reached the concerned Police Station that his brother was forcibly digging a
borewell in his land. The time would be around 12 noon. The concerned
Police reached the village Kharagpur, where Narendra and his brother were
not found on the spot and a person was boring by attaching a boring machine
to a tractor. The tractor driver was stopped and when asked his name was
asked, he told his name as Vijay. The complainant asked him without
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:21463
2 MCRC-26260-2025
permission why he is digging well. Vijay called the family members and
they threatened the complainant for killing and pelting the stones. Thereafter,
an FIR has been registered at crime No.37/2025 for the offence under
Sections 132, 121(1), 115(2), 296, 351(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS and
Section (1)(d), 3(1)(Dh, 3(2)(5ka) of SCST Act has been registered at Police
Station Noorabad, District Morena. The petitioner, who is the owner of said
tractor, moved an application under Section 503 of BNSS for releasing of the
above vehicle which was dismissed by the learned trial Court by impugned
order.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while praying for interim custody
of the subject vehicle submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of
the vehicle in question and therefore, he is entitled for interim custody of the
vehicle. In this regard, counsel for the petitioner 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'.
4. Per contra, learned Govt. Advocate opposed the same and prays
its rejection.
5. The applicant is a registered owner of the vehicle as per the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:21463
3 MCRC-26260-2025
prosecution story, therefore, the said vehicle can be released to him during
pendency of the trial. 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.
6. Keeping in mind the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
o f 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 petitioner deserves to be allowed.
7. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. The impugned order
dated 02.05.2025 passed by learned trial court is set aside and tractor bearing
Registration No. MP07-30-0045 is ordered to be released on 'supurdaginama'
in favour of the petitioner till completion of the trial on the following
conditions:-
(a) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lacs only) 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 petitioner shall get the vehicle aforesaid photographed showing the
registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be
taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the
case.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:21463
4 MCRC-26260-2025
(c) The petitioner 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.
(d) Before releasing the vehicle the trial court shall verify the original
documents of the vehicle.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
mani
