(1) CRI.WP. 943.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 943 OF 2010 Rajendra Shantaram Pardeshi .. Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents ... Mr. A.S. Zarekar, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 28TH OCTOBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The Petition is being heard finally at the stage of admission and is being disposed of inasmuch a very short question seems to have been involved in the matter. 2. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 3. The petitioner is admittedly registered owner of a motorcycle vehicle bearing registration no. MH-16-J-8382. The FIR filed with the Police registered vide C.R. no. I-93 of 2010 prima facie purports to show that the Splendor motorcycle of the (2) CRI.WP. 943.2010 petitioner was seized from the accused persons who had used it during the commission of the alleged offence of assault mounted on the complainant. These accused persons are under scanner and investigation is being proceeded with for offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate by order dated 15.9.2010 rejected the Application of the petitioner for release of the motorcycle vehicle in his favour only on the ground that he might be connected with the alleged offence. It is observed by the learned Magistrate that the vehicle was used for providing weapon to commit the crime. It is difficult to appreciate as to how such kind of inference was drawn by the learned Magistrate. The motorcycle vehicle cannot be treated as a weapon nor it was used for providing any weapon to the petitioner. What appears prima facie is that the petitioner lent the vehicle to his friends which was misused for reaching the place of assault. The reasoning of the learned Magistrate is quite improper and reflects perversity and impropriety. The impugned order is therefore, totally unsustainable. (3) CRI.WP. 943.2010 4. In the result, the Petition is allowed. The vehicle in question shall be released in favour of the petitioner by the concerned P.S.O. on obtaining "lqiqrZukek" in sum of Rs.40,000/- to produce the vehicle as and when required during the trial of the case and not to transfer it to any third party during the pendency of the criminal case. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp