IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21566 of 2011 Ashok Kumar Choudhary, son of Late Dukhi Choudhary @ Dukhay Choudhary, resident of village – Dansar, P.S.- Dagarua, District-Purnia, At present residing in Mohalla – Hajipur, P.S.- Chowk, District- Patna. ….Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar ----------- 2 08.09.2011 The petitioner (accused) claiming himself to be owner of Savari Taxi bearing Registration No. BR11E/2580 and which has been seized in connection with Kudhani (Turki O.P.) P.S. Case No.337/2009, registered under Section 414/34 has filed instant petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. after having his prayer declined by the learned Magistrate, Sandeep Agnihotri dated 18.04.2011 passed in G.R. No.1791/09, T.R. No.2907/11 State Versus Ashok Kumar Chaudhary & Ors. Police official of Kudhani (Turki O.P.) seized vehicle of petitioner while it was in a way to Patna from Muzaffapur being driven in suspicious circumstance and on search stolen electric wire counting ten bundles were recovered from there. Petitioner along with Lukhi was apprehended while remaining two succeeded in their narrow escape. Charge sheet had already been submitted. Cognizance had already been taken. The matter is pending for framing of charge which the learned court will take care of. So far release of vehicle is concerned, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the vehicle in 2 question happens to be registered as Taxi and as a result of which the passengers have free access with their luggage and for that petitioner can’t to held responsible. Also submitted that from the written report itself, it is evident that the recovery was made while the stolen aluminum wire was kept in side bag, which was not known to the petitioner. Also submitted that the real culprit who sat in the vehicle posing themselves to a passenger managed to escape. Also submitted that there happens to be specific direction given by the Hon’ble Apex Court as reported in 2003 SC, page – 638. So submitted that vehicle in question be released in favour of petitioner on appropriate terms and conditions which the court may deem fit and proper. At the other hand learned A.P.P. opposed and submitted that having the registration number of Purnea, the vehicle was seized in between Muzaffarpur to Patna without having any cogent explanation at the hands of petitioner who happens to be owner himself. Two persons were apprehended at the spot including petitioner, but surprisingly enough neither the name of the driver has been disclosed by the petitioner nor the petitioner himself claimed to be a driver of the vehicle nay any driving license has been produced, so submitted the aforesaid transportation was knowingly and intentionally been carried out by the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused. 3 Para-17 of the judgment reported in 2003 AIR SC, Page-638 virtually mandate the situation directing that: “In our view, whatever be the situation, 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 required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.” Admittedly the jeep is lying idle since 2009, therefore, it looks desirable to accede with the prayer of the petitioner. Consequent thereupon it is hereby ordered that Savari Taxi bearing Registration No. BR11E/2580 be released in favour of petitioner on bank guarantee of Rs. 3,00,000/- (three lacs). The petitioner will also produce original owner book, tax token, road permit, insurance paper and the learned lower court will ascertain its authenticity. The petitioner will further undertake to produce the vehicle whenever and wherever required by the Court. The petitioner will also undertake that till conclusion of the trial, he will not change the ownership. PN (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)