H R RANGASWAMY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this court seeking delivery of ownership of the vehicle, which has been seized in the course of investigation in Criminal Proceedings, alleging offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC' for brevity) amongst other Sections of the IPC. It transpires that the petitioner is admittedly the owner of the vehicle, which was used by one of the accused during the alleged commission of the crime. The petitioner having approached the court below in the first instance, the application seeking custody of the vehicle was rejected on the ground that the investigation was on and that the application was premature and could not be considered. Thereafter, a charge-sheet having been filed, the petitioner had renewed his application, which again, was rejected on the ground that the vehicle would be necessary at the trial to be produced in evidence. It is in that background that the petitioner is before this court.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no denial of the fact that the vehicle belonging to the petitioner may have been used by the accused in the commission of the offence. That by itself ought not to deprive the petitioner of the custody of the vehicle and the same would be produced when the vehicle is necessary for production before the court below.

(3.) IT is stated at the bar that the proceedings before the lower court are at the trial stage. It is possible that the vehicle can be marked in evidence and thereafter it can be considered whether the vehicle can be released in favour of the applicant � petitioner. Therefore, with liberty to the petitioner to renew his application before the court below, the present petition stands disposed of without prejudice to his future application.