Shivam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 July, 2022

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shivam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 July, 2022

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                 1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                                 BEFORE
                    HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                         ON THE 14th OF JULY, 2022

                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 29167 of 2022

        Between:-
        SHIVAM S/O VIRENDRA PAWAIYA , AGED
        ABOUT 26 YEARS, VILL RAIPUR DHAMKAN PS
        SATANWADA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                            .....PETITIONER
        (BY MR. ANKUR MAHESHWARI - ADVOCATE)

        AND

        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
        HOUSE OFFICER P.S. SEHORE (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

                                                           .....RESPONDENT
        (BY MR. B.P.S. CHOUHAN - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

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

This petition under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed assailing the order dated 30/4/2022 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Karera, District Shivpuri (M.P.) in CRR No.23/2022, whereby order dated 11/2/2022 passed by JMFC, Karera, District Shivpuri (M.P.) in RCT No. 306/2020 has been affirmed, by which application under Section 457 of CrPC filed by the petitioner for release of Dumper bearing Registration No.MP07 GA 1352 has been rejected.

As per prosecution case, offending Dumper was being used for illegal transportation and excavation of sand tantamount to theft. Therefore, offence 2 under Sections 379 and 414 of IPC has been registered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the seized Dumper is the only source of his livelihood and if the same is permitted to be kept for indefinite period in the open place in the concerning police station, then there is every likelihood of being damaged. Petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any condition which may be imposed by this Court. It is submitted that the impugned order passed by the Courts below are contrary to law as per the MP Minor Minerals Rules and the same are liable to the quashed. Petitioner has already deposited the penalty amount. Offence under Sections 379 and 414 of IPC remains to trial after compounding of other offence and conclusion of trial will take some time. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the case law of Raj Kumar Sahu vs. State of M.P., [2019 (2) MPLJ 438] and decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Singh vs. State of M.P. passed on 03/8/2021 in WP No. 8615 of 2020 as well as order dated 31/8/2021 passed by this Court in MCRC No. 43109 of 2021 (Manoj Kumar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh) and prayed that the seized Dumper may be released to the petitioner on supurdignama during pendency of trial.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the petition and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record. In the case of Sundarbhai Ambala Desai vs. State of Gujarat, [(2002) 10 SCC 283], the Apex Court has held that "it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if 3 required at any point of time."

That apart, this Court in number of cases has ordered for release of vehicle for the reasons as indicated by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment.

This Court in MCRC No. 7021 of 2022 vide order dated 03/3/2022 has already allowed the petition under Section 482 of CrPC in respect to JCB machine seized in the same crime number.

In the case where trial is pending for the offence punishable under Sections 379 of IPC, continuance of seizure of vehicle is not required and, therefore, relying upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court quoted above and after taking into consideration submissions made by rival parties, it is directed that if the petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Magistrate concerned, then the possession of the Dumper in question be given to the petitioner on on supurdignama during pendency of trial subject to following conditions:-

(i) On verification of requisite documents pertaining to seized Dumper in question, the same shall be released and be handed over to the custody of petitioner on Supurdignama subject to confiscation proceedings;

(ii) Petitioner will not make any change in the appearance of the Dumper in question;

(iii) Petitioner shall not create third party rights over the Dumper in question;

(iv) Petitioner shall produce the Dumper before the trial 4 Court/Magistrate, as and when demanded, on his own cost;

(v) It is made clear that after release of Dumper, if same nature of offence or any offence is committed by using this vehicle, the aforesaid Bank Guarantee shall be forfeited automatically without reference to the Court; and

(vi) This order shall remain in force till final disposal of the case pending before the trial Court/Magistrate and at the time of final disposal of the case, the trial Court/Magistrate will be at liberty to pass an appropriate order with regard to Dumper in question in accordance with law without getting influenced by this order, subject to confiscation proceedings, as per law.

In the light of above terms, petition under Section 482 of CrPC is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE AKS ALOK KUMAR 2022.07.15 13:41:49 +05'30' 11.0.23

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court