RANI VERMA Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HON'ble Ashok Srivastava, J.-This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 13.8.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.G. Act), Etah in Criminal Misc. Case No. 11 of 2008 arising out of Session Trial No. 527 of 2008, (Case Crime No. 715 of 2006) under Sections 147,148,149, 302 and 307 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Etah, District Etah.

(2.) A sessions trial was pending before the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 2, Etah and 29.11.2006 was a date fixed for hearing in that case. On that date both the parties were present in the Court campus. At about 12.30 p.m. certain persons entered the Court compound in two motor cars. They were armed with firearms. They allegedly belonged to the party of the accused of the sessions trial, reference whereof has been given above. The armed persons had started indiscriminate firing in the Court compound upon their adversaries. As a consequence, two persons had died in the Court compound. An F.I.R. was lodged the same day at 1.45 p.m. with the police station concerned under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including 302 I.P.C. During the course of investigation of this incident motor vehicle No. PB-10 AM/3716 was seized by the investigating officer and it was parked in the compound of police station concerned. One Smt. Rani Verma, who is the revisionist of this revision moved an application before the learned trial Court, claiming herself to be the owner of the said motorcar, with the prayer that the said car be given to her custody pending trial of the case. The said application was vehemently opposed by the prosecution. After hearing both the parties, the learned lower Court rejected the release application. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) I have gone through the paras 12 to 14 of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), The Apex Court has said that in the cases where the case properties are motor-vehicles, there is no point in keeping them in the police station because no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the same with the police station. In the instant case, the purpose for which the said vehicle was seized and kept in the premises of the police station is that the same shall be produced before the trial Court during the course of trial of the murder case in which allegedly the vehicle was used. Only for this purpose the vehicle is kept in the premises of the police station.