IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1117 of 2008 Sunil Kumar Singh , son of Shree Akshay Lal Singh, at present resident of Mohalla-Pandara (Nava Toli), P.O.-Hehal, P.S.-Sukhdeo Nagar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand), permanent resident of village-Basadhiya, P.S.-Dalsing- sarai, District-Samastipur. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Siwan. 3. The Dy. Superintendent of Police, Siwan. 4. The Officer Incharge, Siswan Police Station, Siwan. -Respondents. ----------- Advocates for the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kumar Praveen. Advocate for the State : AAG-IX. ----------- 06 21.12.2009 The petitioner’s jeep which he has higher purchased was seized in pursuance of Siswan P.S. Case No.111 of 2007 dated 28.11.2007, which has been instituted under Sections 307, 364A and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act as also M.H. Nagar P.S. Case No.136 of 2007 dated 28.11.2007 instituted under Section 364A/34 IPC. Petitioner’s case is that while he was on way, in his absence, the driver unauthorizedly took his vehicle, which got involved in the said case. The driver is still traceless. For the same the petitioner has instituted Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.39 of 2008 dated 19.02.2008. Petitioner restricts his relief in the present writ application only in release of the vehicle. Learned counsel for the State opposes the same though cannot explain the reason for the same. It is not in dispute that on identification parade, the victim boy has identified the vehicle as the vehicle in which - 2 - he was allegedly kidnapped. Petitioner submits that the vehicle being material evidence and it having been identified in the test identification parade by the victim, he will not, at any stage, challenge the said facts. Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the aforesaid, no useful purpose would be served by lying the vehicle to rot at the police station. Petitioner undertakes not to dispose of or sell the vehicle as also not to challenge the factum as recorded in the test identification parade nor to change the particulars of the vehicle in question without permission of the Trial Court. Considering the aforesaid admissions and undertakings, in my view, no useful purpose would be served by laying the vehicle rot in the police custody. I direct that on petitioner furnishing sufficient security before the Trial Court, the Trial Court would order the release of the vehicle to the petitioner, in view of the undertakings noted above. Let the order of this Court be communicated to the Court of Mr. S.D. Dwivedi, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Siwan by FAX at the cost of the petitioner. The writ application is disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)