Patna High Court
Suresh Ray vs The State Of Bihar on 11 December, 2023
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7147 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2021 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
SURESH RAY Son of Vindeshwar Ray Resident of Village - Chehra Kalan,
P.S. - Goraul (Katahara - O.P.), District - Vaishali at Hajipur, at present resides
at 128/A, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Road, Kolkatta - 710006 (W.B.)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-12-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned A.P.P. submits that in compliance of the
order dated 05.10.2023, he had requested the Senior
Superintendent of Police, East Champaran at Motihari to file
counter affidavit but despite his best endeavour he could not
receive any instructions.
3. The Court will not wait for the Senior Superintendent
of Police, East Champaran at Motihari to file his counter affidavit
at his leisure.
4. The present quashing application has been filed
seeking quashing of the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, East Champaran at Motihari
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7147 of 2022 dt.11-12-2023
2/5
in Harshidhi P.S. Case No. 22 of 2021 corresponding to NDPS
Case No. 07 of 2021, whereby the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-III, Motihari, has rejected the application filed by the
petitioner under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. for releasing the
vehicle, i.e. Tata LPT 1412 bearing registration no. WB-23E-
9686, which was seized by the police in connection with the
aforesaid FIR instituted under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian
Penal Code read with Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
learned trial court while rejecting the application for release of the
vehicle relied on the fact that the petitioner did not submit the
driving licence of the driver of the truck in question nor filed the
original copy of the documents relating to the truck. Learned
counsel next submits that no doubt, the vehicle is liable to be
confiscated under Section 60 of the NDPS Act yet by virtue of
Sections 36(c) and 51 of the NDPS Act, the provisions contained
in Sections 451 or 457(1) of the Cr.P.C. would be applicable as
none of the provisions of the NDPS Act are in consistent with the
provisions of the Cr.P.C., hence, in deserving cases the right of
interim custody provided under Sections 451 or 457(1) of the
Cr.P.C. cannot be denied and if the vehicle is allowed to remain in
police station till the trial is not concluded, it will be rendered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7147 of 2022 dt.11-12-2023
3/5
waste and thus would be contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs.
State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
petitioner is a transporter and his vehicle was booked by one
Keshav Singh for transporting the goods of the Express Logistics.
It is further submitted that no doubt, the case has been instituted
under the NDPS Act but then the petitioner has no concern with
the allegations as alleged in the FIR nor he is an accused in the
present case. It is next submitted that the goods of Express
Logistics which were also seized has been released by the Court of
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special
Judge, NDPS-II, East Champaran at Motihari by order dated
02.06.2022
in NDPS Case No. 07 of 2021 arising out of Harsidhi
P.S. Case No. 22 of 2021.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State, in absence of instruction,
is not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel
for the petitioner.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, East Champaran at Motihari
in Harshidhi P.S. Case No. 22 of 2021 corresponding to NDPS
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7147 of 2022 dt.11-12-2023
Case No. 07 of 2021 whereby application filed by the petitioner
under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. seeking release of the seized
vehicle has been dismissed, is hereby quashed and the vehicle is
directed to the released on the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall furnish personal bond of
Rs.10,00,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial court, thereafter the aforesaid truck
shall be handed over to the petitioner on proving ownership of the
vehicle.
(ii) Whenever required by the competent court, the truck
shall be produced on petitioner's expense at the place directed.
(iii) At the time of release of the truck, the authorities
shall ensure to take note of the chassis number, engine number and
registration number of the truck in presence of the petitioner and
obtain his signature and keep the same on record.
(iv) The petitioner shall not alter or change the condition
of the truck in any manner during pendency of the case.
(v) The petitioner shall not create any third party right
over the said vehicle; and
(vi) In the event, all or any of the aforesaid conditions
are found to be violated, the opposite party shall be at liberty to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7147 of 2022 dt.11-12-2023
move this Court for seeking modification of the order passed by
this Court releasing the vehicle.
9. Accordingly, the quashing application is allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 12.12.2023
Transmission Date 12.12.2023
