ANIRUDHSINH BHARATSINH KHER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondent-authority to release the ITACHI MACHINE SY215C-9 Sr. No.19SEY021E79521 bearing Motor Vehicle No.GJ-25-U-7492 in favour of the petitioner, which was seized in connection with the complaint being FIR No.11213042230164 registered with Padadhari Police Station under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Mines & Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act .

(2.) The petitioner herein is the registered owner of the muddamal vehicle, which came to be seized in connection with the impugned First Information Report. It was submitted that the vehicle in question was used for excavating sand and it came to be seized on the ground that sand was being excavated illegally. The vehicle in question is the only source of livelihood of the petitioner and that if the vehicle is kept in continuous detention, its condition would deteriorate. It was, therefore, prayed that the Courts below have seriously erred in not releasing the vehicle in question in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) Heard learned advocates on both the sides and perused the documents on record. Sec. 451 Cr.P.C . mandates that when any property is produced before any criminal Court during the trial, the Court may make order for the proper custody of such property pending the conclusion of the trial. The object of Sec. 451 Cr.P.C. is well defined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, 2003(1) G.L.H. 307, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court have extracted Para- 4 of the judgment delivered in the case of Smt. Basava Kom Dyamangouda Patil vs. State of Mysore and Another [ (1977) 4 SCC 358], as under: