IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1267 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1267 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1267 OF 2008. Naresh Kashinath Jamsutkar. ..Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.O.A. Siddiqui & Rajendra Rathod, for the Petitioner. Mrs.Teja Katdare, i/b. V.K. Khatu, for Respondent No.2. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP, for Respondent No.1. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 10TH JULY,2008. : 10TH JULY,2008. : 10TH JULY,2008. P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned APP for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the second respondent. Considering the controversy involved in the petition, the same is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission. 2. An offence has been registered at Navghar Police Station, Mulund, Mumbai regarding evasion of octroi. The offence was registered at the instance of the officers of the central flying squad of the second respondent. It is alleged that the members of the flying Squad intercepted vehicle No.MH-04-1633 near Star Talkies at Mazgaon. The driver of the vehicle was asked to produce documents relating to goods as well as octroi paid on the goods. It is the case of the second respondent that the driver admitted that he brought the goods from Vasai. According to the second respondent, there was evasion of octroi to the tune of Rs.33,390/- in as much as out of total octroi payable in the sum of Rs.35,544/-, only a sum of Rs.2,154/- was paid by way of octroi. On the basis of the said allegation, FIR was registered with Navghar Police Station. 3. An application was made before the learned Magistrate by the petitioner for return of the seized vehicle alongwith the goods. The said application was opposed by the second respondent. By the impugned order dated 9th September 2008, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 42nd Court, Dadar, Mumbai rejected the application. The rejection was on the ground that the vehicle in question was hypothecated and the balance amount of octroi payable on the goods in the vehicle was not paid. 4. Today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has handed over a demand draft in the sum of Rs.33,390/- drawn in favour of the second respondent. The said demand draft has been accepted by one Mr. Adesh N. Kangale, Superintendent, Central Flying Squad of the second respondent. It is obvious that the amount has been paid by the petitioner without prejudice to his rights and contentions and same has been accepted by the second respondent without prejudice to its rights and contentions. 5. The main ground on which application made by the petitioner was rejected is that the octroi amount was not paid. Now, the said amount has been paid. 6. Now, the vehicle and the goods therein can be returned to the petitioner on the petitioner filing usual bond and undertaking. Usual direction regarding taking photographs of the vehicle and the goods therein can be passed by the learned Magistrate. 7. Hence, I pass the following order:- . (1) The impugned judgment and order dated 9th June 2008 is quashed and set aside. The application made by the petitioner (Exhibit ’B’ hereto) being C.C. No.24/Misc./2008 is allowed. . (2) Before actually releasing the truck and the goods therein, the learned Magistrate will impose appropriate conditions regarding furnishing of bond etc. as indicated in paragraph no.6 above. [ A.S.OKA, A.S.OKA, A.S.OKA, J.] J.] J.]