KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Krishan Kumar has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the order dated 22.5.2006, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby application filed by the petitioner for release of Indica Car bearing registration No. DL-3-CW-2447 on sapurdari in case FIR No. 275 dated 26.12.2005 under Sections 302/328/364- A/120-B/506/201/34 IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, has been dismissed.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , petitioner is the registered owner of the aforesaid vehicle. The trial court has dismissed his application for release of the vehicle on sapurdari only on the ground that the vehicle in question was effectively used in commission of heinous crime punishable under Section 302 IPC.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that the trial court has committed illegality while declining the prayer of the petitioner for release of the vehicle on sapurdari merely because it was used in the commission of a heinous crime. While referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, 2003(1) RCR(Criminal) 380 (SC), counsel contends that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the seized vehicle at police station for a long time, as such vehicles remain unattended and become junk day by day. Counsel contends that in the said decision, the Magistrate was directed to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is ready to give an undertaking that as and when the court requires the aforesaid car, he will produce the same in the same condition before the concerned court. He further relied upon decision of this Court in Roop Chand and Company v. State of Punjab, 1996(1) RCR (Criminal) 401 (P&H).