IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.152 of 2008 BISHNU DEO CHAUDHARY @ BISHUNDEO CHAUDHARY Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4 19.1.2009 In the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for release of Scorpio Jeep bearing registration no.BR-1AP 6536 in favour of the petitioner and for initiation of disciplinary proceeding as well as institution of criminal case against respondents 6 and 7 namely Manmohan Tiwary, Officer-in-charge, Sare P.S. and N.K.Verma, Sub Inspector of Police, Sare P.S. in the district of Nalanda. It is alleged that one Sare P.S. Case No.33 of 2007 dated 18.11.2007 was instituted on the basis of written report of respondent no.6 in which neither the petitioner has been made as an accused nor the number of the vehicle was given but the vehicle of the petitioner has been seized. Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif for release of the aforesaid vehicle in his favour and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by order dated 22.12.2007 ordered for release of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that despite the order passed by the learned Magistrate, the vehicle was not released in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter a Criminal Misc.Case No.2 of 2008 was initiated against respondent nos.6 and 7 namely the Inspector and Sub-Inspector of Sare P.S. A Pleader Commissioner was also appointed. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 20.2.2008 came to the finding that the police without any justifiable reason retained the vehicle of the petitioner despite the release order of - 2 - the court. The court recorded some other findings also regarding the misuse of the vehicle while it was in police custody. The court as such directed for certain deduction from the salary of the aforesaid respondents as mentioned therein. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State stating therein that an information was given to the petitioner vide letter no.115/08 dated 11.3.2008 stating therein that the vehicle in question has already been released and in response to the same the petitioner took his vehicle on 14.3.2008 as would be evident from annexures R/1 and R/2. It is further submitted that the petitioner has giving in writing that he could not take back the vehicle earlier as he was not keeping good health. Having heard counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, this court finds that the order of the court has binding effect unless and until the same is not unsettled by any superior court. In the instant case the court directed the concerned police officers to release the vehicle of the petitioner and as such they were bound to comply with the aforesaid order forthwith but the vehicle was released only after initiation of Criminal Misc. Case No.2 of 2008 in which the learned Magistrate observed that the vehicle in question was retained without any cause. The direction given by the learned Magistrate in the aforesaid case would be binding on the respondents police unless and until the same is altered. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Nalanda for examining the matter against - 3 - KHAN the erring police officers. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. (S.P.Singh,J)