.&.i,A~i^3S.S. Ki^ft ,A¥£<r'B^ Saittosh Kuniar Sord, S/o Sbii Ganesh Prasad Soni (M'ulchtivar Klias), aged about 32. years, by caste Sonar, r/o Nam.najsaia Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G) Rssgondeai: State of Chliattisga.rh, fhrougti-Tlie Station House Officer, PoUce Station Katghora, Distt. Korba (C.GT.) TKB'. rli is- ina i-u ,^d srs^s^f^fSs Shri Arun Kochar and Shri Sameer Siagh, Counsel for thi appucaat. Shri G.K. berhval, Deputj'Advocate General for fae State/ respoiidents. •^^a^^.gj^B ^-;n®E"!'Qi ^•! .3.4. ^'i>.a».4Ma^~ fSS.M.&S^,^ ^? This petitioa is directed agaaist the oider dated 30.11.2006 passed by tlie MSessions jlidge, Korba, ia Ci-uiunal Revision No.52/2006. liie aforesaid Cilminal Reyision was -51ed agam.st fhe order dated 14.11.2006 passed by fhe Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katghora, ia relation to Criine No.327/'2006 registered at poUce Statioa Katghora for ftie ofience piuiishable under sections 407 3s 420/34 ofI.P.C. The brieffacts ai'e that th.e Truck Qearing Re.gn.no.C.G.15-A/ 4508 was seized fcy the PoUce m. coniiection wifh fae aEoresaid Crmie oa 4.11.2006. Thereafter a& application for rcleasdiig fhe Cr.M.P.No.05/2007 vehicle os. Supurdncjna was filed by fhe applicaat in the capacity of Power of Attomev Kolder of the res'istered owner of tlie vehicfe iiamely Jawaharlal Soni , s/o Gemesh Prasad Soiii, aged about 45 years, resideiit of Pratappur Naka, Axabikapur, Distt. Sarguja (C. G) . T'he said appUcation was disinissed by the couceriied Magistrate 011 14.11.2006 on the grouad that fhe appMcaat, sho-sriiig iTLmselfto fce the Power of Attomey Holder of fhe registered owser, is clairaiiis possession of tae vehicle aiid the allegati'UllS <-liC 'f' 'f'r^t ^=1 •!-^'? -? -?/-n T\ ^=. LlillUCj 't'^- /^~^ "4~T^>^ •^^t'3^1 T^'f^T^jf^^rf'^- ^X7Ci C '^^i^^'^^J /?!'^~^^? ^T^^y^C'i'f^'^T'* ~T'^ T1?7CS^ ^^=l-3T~'i <y. "^-?<?^i/^ jJldLC 'Ul LL1C Bci-iU VCliJA-'l.C Wdy lUJ.^CU. fcLUU Li.lCi.'Cdltd' i.i. '•A/cs-'i5 L?'Clllg tlKG^I T^~^' ^'T^-^TT'l ^^T^^ST'^Cs4'^'?:lT' O -^T^'T^^'i'T^ Ci^ '!!^=:lT7'ia~^^T^i T'^71Q ^ '?^1^<;1 T^yT^ "3^^s"s T'S7C^ ^:: O^C11 X .l.lCi.CcU.LCl, ct -^i l±li_LU.dl Ji.CVJLS^.U^-i W.ctS J-MCU. Wi—liJli.yYd..S .t;LiySJ disEiissed by the Addl. Sessions judge, takiag almost siiuflar vieii.7 wnich was takea by the Magistrate. It is agamst tliis order passed by the two Courts below fhe petitioner, sho'i'iriiig hiiaself to be fhe Power of Attomev Holder of the registered owner, has filed tliis ''~'-r^m"-sc*'! 'h^^v.-r^ P^t-?t-5^;' 1—Ls^l.l.caJ.IViiiS^/. J'C^-iU.^-U.. I have Iisard leamed counsel for fhe parties at leagfh azid have also perused the recoris ofthis Misc. Petitton. SectioQ 451 Cr.P.C. enipowers tlie Coiirt te pass appropriate orders with regard to a propert)- of cruaiiial trial. This provides that the orders should be passed by fhe cozicemed court for fhe proper custody peadiag conclusion of fhe enqiru^- or trial; or to order it to be sold or othenvise disposed of, after recordiag such evideace £.s it things necessaiy; aiid if tlie pioperty is subject to ihe speedy aacl aatural decay, to dispose of the saiiie. The power shoiild t>e exercised expeditiously aiid j-udiciously as a quick actioa wiE not render the owuer of fhe article to suffer because of its reiziauiiiij unused or is. sonie cases by its Qiisappropriation and fhe Coiirt or the police would also uot be required to keep the article in safs custody till fhe disposal of the trial aiid if ttie propei-h' is a ve^ucle, as in. ths present case, the quick disposal is necessitated beca-ase it is of jio use to keep such seized veliicle at fae Police station for a long period as ultiinatety the long detention woiild render irito a juiik and fhe laachiaer;7 as weU as body parts would be of no use for no body. "II 1:L" Cr.M.P.No.05/2007 1....S® -'<ao The m.ost uiiportant pruiciple, oyer and above, what has beeii stated earlier is fhat fhe property Biust be given in iiiteriro. custody of a persoa who is really entitied to b.old its custody. ?ii case of a vehicle tjie registered o'nTier would be the best person to hold the custody ofth.e vehicle and ifno riyal clami is niade against &e claiin of fhe registered owner, tlie property shouM be given iu iiiterim custody ofthe said o%7ner. la tiie present case, in fact, fhe power of attomey holder has clsiined for delivei}' of the property on fhe basis of Pov-.'er of AttorEey said to have been executed ia Ilis favour by me registered owner. I't is stated that since fhe registered owner was not well at the tmie of filmg offhe iiiitial petition, therefore, the said Power ofAttoraey was executed bv hizu. Learned counsel for the petitioiier is not able to state as to what is tbfi present position regaiding fhe healfh condition of the registered owner. However, lie' subniit fb.s.t aow the registered owiier caa file a petitioii for releasiilg the veiTicle on Supurdna'trid aad he laay be given a chaace to niove such EUI application. Needless to say fb.at there is' no uecessity of passiag aiiy order ia fhis regard. The registered owiier is aJways at his rights to file sui appUcation for claimiag the iiiteriin custody of the vehicle. However, it is observed tiiat if fhe registered owner himself files aii appMcation before the tnal Court for releasiag fhe vehicle on Supiirdnam.a along-with the registration certi&cates etc., of tlie vehicle,as are usually required, the trial Court shall examiae tlie sa.me and keepiiig iil aiuid fhe priiiciples, referred to above, by this Goiut, it shaU decide the applicatioii ofthe registered owner as eai'ly as possible preferably ••.sTitIiiu a period of 15 days froia the date of filmg of such an appUcation aloiigtt'ifh tlie certified copy of this order before fhe said Court. With the aforesaid observations, fbis pe'dtion is liiiall}' disposed of. J^L Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge