KUNAL BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that vide order dated 4.5.2012 which had wrongly been recorded as 3.5.2012 seven vehicles registration numbers of which are JH-05AD-8172, JH-05AD-8127, JH-015AF-8712, JH-05AD-8721, JH-22AO-441 as well as two Pocklain Machines PC 200 excavators were ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner No. 1 on filing an affidavit that all these seven vehicles belongs to him. Other condition had also been imposed. Pursuant to that order, an affidavit on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody, was filed before the Court below upon which release order was issued by the learned Court below but since the petitioner No. 1 being in custody could not appear before the concerned police station, police did not release those vehicles in favour of the representative of the petitioner No. 1 and therefore, an interlocutory application bearing No. 876 of 2012 was filed before this Court wherein prayer has been made to modify the order to the extent that the vehicles be ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner's representative, namely, Mritunjay Kumar, son of Harinarayan Choudhary.

(2.) However, that prayer was objected on that day by the learned counsel appearing for the State by taking a plea that Calcutta High Court has passed an order with respect to three vehicles whereby respondents have been restrained from selling, removing, transferring, alienating or otherwise parting with possession of the assets specified in the petition presently under the custody of the police and in the garb of that order, plea was taken on behalf of the State that there would be difficulty on the part of the police officials to release the vehicles in favour of the petitioner or his representative, in view of the order passed by the Calcutta High Court but learned counsel appearing for the State failed to take notice that the police officials had never been made party in the case before the Calcutta High Court and therefore, that order was never binding on him. So far as the petitioner No. 1 is concerned, he will be abiding by the order passed by the Calcutta High Court and therefore, the order passed by this Court on 3.5.2012 be modified to the extent that the vehicles be ordered to be released in favour of the representative, namely. Mritunjay Kumar, son of Harinarayan Choudhary.

(3.) It was further submitted that so far 13 vehicles are concerned, numbers of which have been given below are also the subject-matter of this application.