ANSHU CHOPRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present litigation depicts a sad and unfortunate incident. But the picture does not remain tainted as the learned Advocate General frescoed the scene in the utmost truthful manner in spite of the contrary stand in the return and truth always ostracises all that is reprehensible and ushers in a shining glory where hope again blooms.

(2.) SMT. Anshu Chopra, the petitioner herein, has approached this Court to call for the entire records pertaining to impounding of her vehicle bearing registration No. M. P. 20-F-5633 and that of all other similar private vehicles on the ground that such an action is not permissible in law and further to take appropriate action against the officials concerned. It has been putforth that on 18-4-2001 when the petitioner was coming back from the clinic of Dr. Ajay Saraf, a paediatrician, after availing treatment of her 31 years old child, who was suffering from allergic bronchitis and viral infection, at about 1 p. m. the respondent No. 4, Traffic Sub-Inspector of Traffic Police Station, Jabalpur, stopped her car and asked her to go in a rickshaw and impounded the vehicle. When the petitioner resisted why the car was being impounding she was ill-treated and later on, was apprised that the vehicle was needed for the purpose of use in connection with the Congress Party convention which was going to be held at Jabalpur wherein national level leaders including Smt. Sonia Gandhi were to attend. Under the threat and coercion of the respondent No. 4, her sick child and driver were virtually thrown out of the car and she had to take a rickshaw to reach her home. On 19-4-2001 the husband of the petitioner complained the incident to the Police Station, Madan Mahal under whose jurisdiction the particular locality, from where the car was impounded, falls. However, no cogent answers were given by the police and the petitioner insisted to lodge an FIR. It was in the form of a protest and was received by the police station concerned. It has been averred that nothing was given in writing to the petitioner as a consequence of which the husband of the petitioner called upon the Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur, on 23-4-2001 and told him about his grievances. It is setforth that eventually the vehicle was given back to the petitioner on 24-4-2001. After getting back the vehicle it was noticed by the petitioner that it has been put to extremely misuse and there has been a lot of damages to the vehicle. It is urged in the petition that in the garb of administrative arrangement the vehicle of the petitioner was taken away without any provision of law. With the aforesaid factual averments reliefs have been sought for, as have been indicated hereinabove.

(3.) AN application has been filed by the petitioner for bringing subsequent events on record which need not be stated in detail at this point.