T N GIRI Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of specific orders issued by this court in Crl.M.C.No.1605/06 on 23/08/2006, the learned Magistrate is not effectively implementing the directions in the said order. The report of the learned Magistrate was called for. The report shows that the learned Magistrate is taking steps to comply with the order. In the meantime, the additional third respondent has entered appearance.

(2.) The vehicle was released by the learned Magistrate, subject to conditions, to the additional third respondent. When the learned Magistrate directs the additional third respondent to produce the vehicle before the court, the additional third respondent has got to comply with the same. If he does not comply with the said directions, the learned Magistrate must take necessary coercive steps to seize the vehicle and get it produced before court. Appropriate action can be taken against the additional third respondent and the sureties also.

(3.) The report of the learned Magistrate shows that the petitioner has not filed any application for release of the vehicle to him. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such application was not filed as the presence of the vehicle before the court was not secured by the learned Magistrate. The learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to file such an application immediately even if the vehicle is not produced. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file such an application. Such application shall be filed within ten days from this date - on or before 15/01/2007.