Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.33 seconds)

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs State Of Gujarat on 18 November, 2002

9. Noticing the law, which has been laid down and which has been followed thereafter by this Court in number of matters, we are of the opinion that the provision of Section 452 of the Code and Para-227 of the Criminal Manual even when require the continuity of the muddamal articles which is not perishable, the ratio laid down in case of Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) shall necessarily need to be employed in the present case and in all such matters where there is no dispute with regard to ownership of the vehicle. 9.1 The Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that the appellant is the father of one of the convicts and therefore is not joining his own son here cannot be blown out of proportion. Since the learned advocate Mr. Dave represents the son in pending the appeal, on instructions, he submits that Page 15 of 16 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 10:31:02 IST 2022 R/CR.A/952/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/08/2021 the son has no objection if the vehicle is being handed over to the father. After due verification of the certificate of registration by R.T.O. and on completion of drawing of the panchnama of the vehicle lying with the Mandvi Police Station as also taking the videograph and photograph of the said vehicle, the police officer In-charge of Mandvi police station shall hand over the vehicle to the appellant. The entire procedure to be completed within period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 21090 - Full Document

Smt. Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil vs State Of Mysore And Anr. on 19 April, 1977

Referring to Section 451 and 457 of the Code, the Court referred to the decision rendered in case of Smt. Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil v. State of Mysore [AIR 1977 SC 1749] where the Apex Court dealt with the case where a seized article were not available to be returned to the complainant. There the recovered ornaments had been kept in the trunk in the police station and later were found missing. The Court held that the seizure of the property by the police amounts to clear entrustment of the property to a Government servant and the property should be restored to the original owner after the necessity to retain it ceases. There may be two stages where the property may be returned to the owner. In the first phase, during any inquiry or trial if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay; and there may be other compelling reasons which will justify the disposal of the property to the owner or otherwise, in the interest of justice. The High Court and the Sessions Court since had proceeded on the footing that there may be a Page 11 of 16 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 10:31:02 IST 2022 R/CR.A/952/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/08/2021 requirement of the articles seized to be produced before the Court during the trial, the Apex Court held that the object seems to be that any property which is under control of the Court either directly or indirectly should be disposal off by the Court and a just and proper order should be passed regarding disposal of the articles. The police always acts in a case under the direct control of the Court and hence has to take the order from it at every stage of inquiry or trial. In nutshell, it has held that the Court exercises overall control on the actions of the police officers in every case where it has taken the cognizance. The Court further held that when the property is stolen, lost or destroyed and there is no prima facie defence made out that the State or its officers had taken due care or caution to protect the property, the Magistrate may in an appropriate case where ends of justice so require, order payment of value of the property. Therefore, to avoid such a situation, the Court held that the powers under Section 451 of the Code shall be exercised promptly and at the earliest.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 596 - S M Ali - Full Document
1