Patna High Court - Orders
M/S Dhl Ecommerce (India) Private ... vs The State Of Bihar on 19 September, 2023
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50963 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2023 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
M/S DHL eCOMMERCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY
INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT THROUGH
ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE NAMELY SHRI SHASHI
KUMAR, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT 702, 7TH
FLOOR, TOWER B, 247 PARK, L.B.S. MARG, VIKHROLI (WEST)
MUMBAI, MUMBAI CITY, MAHARASHTRA (INDIA)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Gupta
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-09-20231. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned A.P.P. for the State is directed to file a counter-affidavit duly sworn by the S.S.P., Aurangabad, clearly replying the averments made in the quashing application as it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle, in question, which has been seized is registered in the name of M/s D.H.L. E-Commerce (India) Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, further a company is a juristic person and it can sue and can be sued, it is next submitted that Company, being a juristic person and also being owner of the vehicle, had executed a power of attorney in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50963 of 2023(3) dt.19-09-2023 2/3 favour of one Shashi who had filed an application under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. seeking release of the vehicle but the same came to be rejected by an order dated 30.06.2023 which is impugned in the present quashing application on the ground that the owner of the vehicle is also an accused in the case and he has not surrendered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that perhaps the learned Trial Court, while rejecting the application for release, was not able to appreciate the law in its correct perspective that a company, duly incorporated under the Companies Act, is a juristic person and can sue and can be sued and it was the company who had executed the power of attorney in favour of Shashi through one of its Director for getting the vehicle released, it is also submitted that the vehicle was seized on the ground that beef was found in the vehicle when the company is a transport company and the seized vehicle was hired by the customers and as such, the company was not aware that the vehicle would be misused in the manner as alleged, it is further submitted that even the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. The State of Gujarat, 2002 10 SCC 283, has held that it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police station for a long period. It is for Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50963 of 2023(3) dt.19-09-2023 3/3 the Magistrate to pass appropriate order immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security of return of the said vehicle, if required at any point of time, this can be done pending hearing of application, for return of such vehicle.
4. Put up this case on 06.10.2023.
5. In the event if no counter-affidavit is filed by that date, the Court may consider the desirability of summoning the S.S.P., Aurangabad.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) HarshPandey/-
U T