Crl. Misc. No. M-26258 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-26258 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 19.04.2011 Ranjit Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Guninder Singh Brar, A.A.G. Punjab RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 31.3.2009 (Annexure P6) whereby the revision filed by petitioner No. 1 against the order dated 19.02.2008 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judgicial Magistrate, Nabha before the learned Sessions Judge, was dismissed. The petitioner has claimed himself to be the registered owner of vehicle (Mahindra Pick up van) bearing No. PB-13-M- 4662. Vide order dated 31.03.2009, Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala has ordered that the vehicle be released to Sh. Surinder Singh from whom it was taken into possession and Surinder Singh was further directed to hand over the said vehicle to Rohit Kohli. Counsel for the petitioner contends that initially, vide order dated 26.07.2007 (Annexure P3), Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nabha had given direction to release the vehicle in question to its owner Ranjit Singh against the proper receipt. Subsequently, this order was modified on 19.02.2008 on an application made by Daman Sharma that he was owner of the vehicle in question. It was a case of simple traffic challan under Section 207 of Motor Vehicle Act. Vide order dated 19.02.2008, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nabha had declined to release the Crl. Misc. No. M-26258 of 2010 (O&M) -2- vehicle to Daman Sharma and Rohit Kohli. Subsequently, on 31.03.2009, a direction was given to release the vehicle to Surinder Singh, Driver. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on judgments of this Court rendered in the cases of Naf Singh vs. Devender Kumar 2004 (1) RCR (Criminal) 987, Kulwant Singh vs. State of Haryana 2008 (1) RCR (Criminal) 828 and Narinder Kumar Singla vs. State of Punjab and another 2006 (3) RCR (Criminal) 890 and has argued that the registered owner is the competent person to take away the vehicle during the pendency of the trial. In the present case, there is no dispute that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question, which is lying in the custody of the police w.e.f 16.06.2007. The order dated 31.03.2009 is modified by giving direction that vehicle be released to the petitioner as per the conditions imposed by the Court below. April 19, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) G.Arora JUDGE