Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (2.17 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 30 in The Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Sunderbha1 Ambalal Desai vs State Of Gujarat on 1 October, 2002
8. We are afraid that we cannot agree with the above submissions made by the Director General of Prosecution. A reading of the decision of the Apex Court in Sunderbai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2003) SCC (Crl.) 1943, will indicate that the guidelines therein regarding interim custody of properties produced in Court are applicable to all categories of properties including vehicles. Of course, it is true that those directions and guidelines are for the purpose of giving interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C. till the conclusion of trial after which the property will have to be brought back to the custody of the Court to be made available for final disposal under Section 452 Cr.P.C. Then the further question is whether there is any express or implied bar under the Enforcement Act or the Standards Act or the Rules framed thereunder to exclude the application of Section 451 Cr.P.C. to properties such as tanker lorries like the one produced in this case. Prima facie, it appears to be a far-fetched argument on behalf of the prosecution that the measure in this case not only consists of the tank mounted on the chassis of the lorry but also the chassis. The definition of none of the expressions relied on by the prosecution, prima facie, suggests that it is entirety of the chassis together with the tank mounted on it which constitutes the measure. There is no dispute that what is manufactured and supplied to the buyers of a lorry or bus is the chassis which comes out of the factory and depending on the use of which the buyer intends to put, the required structure either in the form a stage carriage or a tank or a platform with side walls etc. is mounted on the chassis. In the case on hand, it is a fuel tank which has been mounted on the chassis. The tanker lorry together with the tank in the present case was admittedly calibrated. Merely because for the purpose of calibration it is the lorry together with the tank mounted on it that is necessary, that does not mean that the entirety of the chassis with the tank mounted on it constitutes the measure. Prima facie, there is nothing in the aforesaid Acts or the Rules suggesting such an interpretation.