VIKRAM Vs. A C J M SAHARANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KRISHNA Kumar, J. This revision has been filed against the order dated 14. 2. 2000 whereby the application of the revisionist for release or the vehicle was rejected. On a perusal of the order, it is clear that the vehicle in question is not covered under Motor Vehicle Act, as it is called "jugar" and far that the registration is not necessary. It is however, clear that such type of vehicle can not be bought on the road. From the order of the Magistrate it is also clear that no challan was received in the Court. Application was rejected because no such challan was received by the Court. An-nexure-4 is the report of the Assistant Transport Officer in which it was mentioned that the Vehicle was seized and it can not be released by the Court. Learned Counsel for the revisionist placed reliance upon 1998 Judicial Criminal Cases page 20 wherein the same matter was involved and in that case also "jugar" was seized by the Transport Depart ment. In that case "jugar" was released on under-taking given by the owner that he will not ply it on the road. The "jugar" was dismantled and oil engine was released and given in the Supurdgi of the revisionist.

(2.) CONSIDERING the said case law I am convinced with the contention. The lower Court is directed that "jugar" dismentaled and oil engine be given in the Supurdgi of the revisionist on terms and condition deem, fit and proper by the Court of the C. J. M. The revisionist shall appear before the C. J. M. who shall fix terms and conditions and on compliance shall release oil engine in favour of the revisionist who shall give undertaking that he shall not use the vehicle called "jugar" in future and shall not ply it on the public road. The Jugar in question shall also be dismentaled. It is further directed and in case the case may be compounded under Section 208 of Motor Vehicle Act, the case maybe compounded by the Magistrate. Revision disposed of. .