SUPET SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the order dtd. 13/1/2025 passed by the I Additional Session Judge, Anuppur District Auppur in Cr.R. No.2803/2024 (25/2024) arising out of the order dtd. 22/11/2024 passed by JMFC, Anuppur Districrt Anuppur in connection with Crime No. 170 of 2024 whereby the application moved by the applicant under Sec. 497, 503 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for releasing the vehicle bearing registration No. CG-10-BV-0585 on supurdginama, has been declined.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant contends that present applicant moved an application for releasing the Auto bearing registration No. CG-10- BV-0585 on supurdginama. the said Auto has been seized by the Police in view of a registration of a case under Sec. 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act. During pendency of the trial, an application was moved for release of the vehicle in favour of the present applicant as he is registered owner of the alleged vehicle, yet, the said application has been declined while observing that as the Court has received an intimation as regards the confiscation of the vehicle, therefore, the powers to release the vehicle in question on supurdginama cannot be exercised. The said order was challenged by filing a revision, but the Revisional Court has also dismissed the same. It is contended by the counsel that the order of confiscation cannot be passed unless there is judgment of conviction in the original case. In the present case, as of now, there is no conviction under Sec. 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, therefore, vehicle in question ought to have been released in favour of the present applicant as, the condition of the vehicle is going to be deteriorated in prolong custody of the police. Thus, counsel submits that the order impugned deserves to be set aside.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and supported the order passed by the Trial Court, which is impugned in the petition. It is contended by the counsel that the vehicle in question is subject matter of an offence which is committed under Sec. 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act and an intimation was received by the Court that the confiscation proceedings were initiated and thus, by virtue of Sec. 47-A of the M.P. Excise Act, the Court is precluded from releasing the vehicle on supurdginama in favour of the present applicant.