IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.584 of 2009 Brij Mohan Singh, son of Late Raghubans Singh, resident of Basnaw Petrol Pump, Alaipur, P.S. Alaipur, District- Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh ……….. Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram 3.The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sasaram, District Rohtas 4.The Assistant District Supply Officer, Sasaram, District- Rohtas at Sasaram …………….. Respondents ----------- 2. 04/02/2010 Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to respondent no.2, namely, District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram to dispose of the release petition filed for release of his truck seized in connection with Kochas (Parsathua) P.S.Case No.99 of 2007. From the certified copy of the order sheet annexed as Annexure-3, it appears that a confiscation case was instituted in 2007 itself for confiscation of the truck and the bags of fertilizers loaded on it. Proceeding continued for almost one year and thereafter on 11.11.2008 a petition was filed on behalf of petitioner for release of the truck. Since then, the order sheet shows, the petition has remained pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State - 2 - of Gujarat, reported in 2002(10) S.C.C. 283, in which certain guidelines have been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for early release of vehicles. He submits that in terms of the said guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vehicle of the petitioner should have been released by the respondent District Magistrate with such terms and conditions as he may determine. It is a known fact that proceeding of confiscation remains pending for years and materials involved in the proceeding remain lying in open in the Police Station causing irreparable damage to the property and loss to owners. The guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said judgment has dealt with this aspect of the matter and has held that in normal course vehicles etc. and other articles seized should be released at an early date with sufficient surety, bond, panchnama and on other conditions as the court/authority may deem fit and proper. Respondent District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram is also required to consider the said application of the petitioner in the light of the said guidelines - 3 - laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. Therefore, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to respondent District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram to consider the petition of the petitioner filed on 11.11.2008 at an early date and pass appropriate orders on the same expeditiously but not later than two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Respondent District Magistrate may take into account the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred judgment for the purpose. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)