Delhi District Court
Sh. A.K. Singh vs The State on 8 September, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SMT SARITA BIRBAL :
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE: KKD COURTS: DELHI
Crl. (Rev) No.: 68/2011
Sh. A.K. Singh,
s/o late Sh. S.K. Singh,
r/o 4/372, B.N. Nagar,
Shahdara, Delhi
(owner of vehicle
No. DL PB3581) ...........Petitioner
Versus
The State ........ Respondent
Criminal revision u/s. 397 of CrPC for
setting aside the impugned order
dated 06.04.2011 passed by Sh. Ajay
Kumar Malik, ld. MM
Date of allocation of present revision petition to this Court:16.05.2011
Date on which the judgment has been reserved : 07.09.2011
Date on which judgment delivered: : 08.09.2011
JUDGMENT
1. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 06.04.2011 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the application of petitioner seeking permission to prepare the inventory of the articles lying in the bus bearing no. DL1PB3581 was dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of present revision petition are that the petitioner herein claims himself to be registered owner of the bus bearing registration no. DL1PB3581. The case of prosecution Crl. (R) No. 68/2011 Page 1 of 4 is that the said bus was found unauthorisedly parked at road no. 57 (main road), Kanti Nagar causing obstruction in flow of traffic and thus the police took charge of the said bus under section 66 of Delhi Police Act vide DD no. 3 A VKC Traffic Circle, PS Vivek Vihar. It appears that the petitioner made certain allegations about damage to the bus by police while it was in custody of police officials and removal of the parts of bus which led to filing of an application for permission to prepare an inventory of damage/loss/stolen part of the bus from any authorised service station of M/s. Ashok Leyland in the court of concerned MM.
3. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate has allowed the application of petitioner for placing on record the photographs of the bus. However, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dismissed the application of the petitioner seeking permission to prepare the inventory of the damage/stolen parts of the bus by an authroised service station. The relevant portion of the impugned order is as under:
"Today again on 06.04.2011 the applicant moved one more application seeking permission to get prepare the inventory of damage/lost/stolen part belonging to the bus from authorised service center. It is observed that the prayer of the present application is similar to the application already disposed above in which the applicant was allowed to take photographs of the bus bearing no. DL1PB3581 for ascertaining the damage and the applicant has already taken the photographs and file the copy of photographs in the court. Hence, the present 2nd application is infructuous and Crl. (R) No. 68/2011 Page 2 of 4 stands dismissed, as no orders to cost."
4. I have heard Shri Arvind Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Maqsood Ahmed, ld Addl PP for the State with Shri Ajit Pratap Sigh Adv. Record perused.
5. I have given consideration to the submissions made by the parties.
6. Power to take charge of the unclaimed property and subsequent procedure to be followed in such cases is provided under section 66 to 69 Delhi Police Act. Section 66 of the Act is reproduced as under:
"66. Police to take charge of unclaimed property:(1) It shall be the duty of every police officer to take temporary charge
(a) of all unclaimed property found by, or made over to, him; and
(b) of all property found lying in any public street, if the owner or person in charge of such property, on being directed to remove the same, refused or fails to do so, (2) The police officer taking charge of the property under subsection (1) shall furnish an inventory thereof to the Commissioner of Police."
7. The police has filed status report and photocopies of alleged inventory made in some register and copies of other documents. I have gone through the same. The same can not be considered as an inventory in any manner. Moreover, it is also admitted that the copy of the alleged inventory was not Crl. (R) No. 68/2011 Page 3 of 4 furnished to the Commissioner of Police as required u/s. 66 (2) Delhi Police Act.
8. In these circumstances, it is directed that ACP concerned Traffic Circle, Vivek Vihar shall prepare the inventory of the articles lying in the bus or affixed to it in the presence of the petitioner - Shri A. K. Singh on 16.09.2011 at 2 p.m. It is further directed that the copy of that prepared inventory be furnished to the Commissioner of Police in accordance with Section 66 (2) of Delhi Police Act. The copy of the prepared inventory be also provided to the petitioner.
9. As far as the prayer of petitioner regarding investigation of matter is concerned, no order is called for. Insofar as the prayer of the petitioner regrading assessment of loss to the bus through a Government Approved Valuer is concerned, it is informed by the parties during arguments that the civil suit on the subject matter of this petition has already been filed by the petitioner against the concerned police officials.
10. Present Criminal revision petition is disposed of accordingly.
11. A copy of this order be sent to court concerned with TCR and another copy of this order be sent to ACP concerned, Traffic Circle, Vivek Vihar. Copy of this order be given dasti to the petitioner also. Revision petition file be consigned to RR.
Announced in the open court (Sarita Birbal)
08.09.2011. ASJ: KKD Courts: Delhi.
Crl. (R) No. 68/2011 Page 4 of 4