IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.446 of 2008 SHAMBHU CHAUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 22.7.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the instant application the petitioner prays for release of Pick-Up Van bearing registration no.BR 06J-3002 which was seized in connection with Piyar P.S. Case No.24 of 2008 in a case under section 7 of the E.C. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a P.D.S. Dealer had hired his vehicle commercially for carrying certain food grains alleged to be surreptitiously taken from the godown of Food Corporation of India. He further submits that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle in question and he was not aware that the food grains in question were being illegally taken by the P.D.S. dealer. He submits that he had filed an application before the learned S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur for release of the vehicle but the learned Magistrate refused to release the vehicle stating that as the confiscation proceeding has started, he has no power to release the vehicle in question. Learned counsel submits that pendency of confiscation proceeding would be no bar to the jurisdiction of this court in exercising the power relating to release of vehicle. In support of his contention he relies upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors Vs Rameshwar Rathod, A.I.R. 1990 SC 1849. In the aforesaid case a bench of the Madhya Pradesh - 2 - KHAN High Court had passed an order releasing the vehicle in question notwithstanding the continuance of confiscation proceeding under section 6A of the E.C. Act. Against the aforesaid order, the State of Madhya Pradesh went in appeal before the Hon’ble Apex Court contending that the High Court had no power and jurisdiction to release the vehicle in question, as confiscation proceeding in this regard was continuing. The Apex Court rejecting the contention of the State of Madhya Pradesh observed that the continuance of confiscation proceeding will not pre empt the jurisdiction of the High Court in passing appropriate order in respect of release of the vehicle in question. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid case coupled with the fact that the petitioner was not a P.D.S. dealer and his vehicle was merely hired for transporting the food grains in question, I observe that if the petitioner files an application before the S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur for release of the vehicle in question, the learned Magistrate would release his Pick-Up Van bearing registration no.BR 06J-3002, after being satisfied about the ownership of the vehicle, on furnishing sufficient security to his satisfaction. It is made clear that the release of the vehicle in question will be subject to the result of the confiscation case. Let this order be communicated through fax at the cost of the petitioner. (S.P.Singh,J) - 3 -