NIRGUN TIWARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this miscellaneous application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure relates to a tractor bearing registration No. BRD-3385. From the contents of the application, the documents and the impugned order annexed thereto as well as the submissions made at the bar it appears that the tractor originally belonged to one Alakhdeo Singh. According to the petitioner, Alakhdeo Singh sold the tractor to him on 30.6.1980 whereafter he took steps for transfer of ownership. The ownership was transferred and necessary endorsement to that effect was made in the certificate of registration on 5.11.1983. The petitioner has been paying taxes thereafter. In the meantime, opposite party No. 2 Shyam Narayan Singh, who is nephew of the said Alakhdeo Singh filed complaint before the Magistrate alleging theft of the said tractor. In course of time the Police to which the complaint was referred under Section 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, submitted the charge-sheet and Alakhdeo Singh was put on trial. It may be mentioned that the petitioner herein does not figure as an accused in that case.

(2.) It appears that Shyam Narayan Singh filed an application for release of the tractor in his favour before the trial Court. The application was rejected on 21.8.1982. Against that order he moved the Sessions Judge, Siwan in criminal revision No. 343/82. The 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan who heard the case on transfer, by his order dated 21.9.1983 allowed the prayer for release. The said Alakhdeo Singh moved this Court in criminal revision No. 831/83. On 25.11.1986 the revision was dismissed. Thereafter on 4.1.1997 the trial Court passed an order to seize the tractor so that the aforesaid order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 21.9.1983 could be carried out. The present impugned order dated 21.2.1997 has been passed in continuation of the earlier order dated 4.1.1997. It may be mentioned here that apart from issuing direction for release of the tractor in favour of opposite party No. 2 the Court below has also issued warrant of arrest against the petitioner for being in possession of stolen property under Section 201 of the Penal Code.

(3.) Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that both the directions for release of the tractor as well as the arrest of the petitioner are illegal for the simple reason that the tractor was never seized nor any prosecution with respect to the offence under Section 201, IPC, has been lodged against the petitioner. He submitted as regards the first part that unless the property is seized and seizure is reported to the Court as contemplated by Section 457, Cr PC, the Court has no jurisdiction to pass an order of release.