Patna High CourtCR. REV./57/2017dismissed

Amit Anand v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-05-18Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.57 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Amit Anand, Son of Sri Suresh Prasad Singh, Resident of village - Patedhi Bhaikhan, P.S. Belsar ( O.P. ), District - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Subodh Kumar Singh, Son of Satyanarayan Singh, resident of Rambagh Shastri Nagar, P.S. Mithanpura, District - Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niraj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-05-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. The petitioner had sought for release of a vehicle, which has been seized in connection with Mithanpura Police Station Case No. 357 of 2014, by filing an application in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (East), Muzaffarpur, which came to be rejected by an order, dated 02.11.2016.

The said order, dated 02.11.2016, is under challenge in the present criminal revision application. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that there is a dispute over ownership between the petitioner and Opposite Party No. 2 herein. That is the ground on

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.57 of 2017 (3) dt.18-05-2017 2/2 which the learned Court below has refused to release the vehicle, in question, in favour of the petitioner. I am not inclined to entertain this criminal revision application for two reasons. Firstly, the order, which has been passed, cannot be said to be a final order so as to maintain criminal revision application against that order. Secondly, there being dispute over the ownership of the vehicle between the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2, interference with the order is not warranted. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order rejecting the application for release of the vehicle. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √