Shila Devi v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2569 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- MADHUBANI ===========================================================
1. Shila Devi, Wife of Vijay Kumar Sahani, Resident of Village- Malmal Pashchim, P.S.- Kaluahi, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Madhubani.
4. The Officer Incharge, Basopatti, Police Station, Madhubani.
5. The Anchal Adhikari cum Block Supply Officer, Basopatti, Madhubani. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Partha Sarthy, GA-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The vehicle of this petitioner bearing registration No.BR-32GA/1588 was seized in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No.151 of 2017, a case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.
3. This writ application has been preferred for release of the vehicle bearing registration No. BR-32GA/1588.
4. Submission of the learned counsel of the petitioner is that the continued seizure of the vehicle would serve no purpose and its confiscation and auction would amount to pre-trial punishment, which is not permissible in law and the same issue is pending consideration before a larger Bench of this Court in LPA No.1647 of 2015 Baleshwar Roy V. The State of Bihar & Ors. Hence, interim release of the vehicle be ordered as no purpose is going to
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.2569 of 2017 dt.13-12-2017 P2/ be served by its continued detention in police lockup.
5. The learned counsel for the State-respondent has opposed the prayer. However, does not dispute the aforesaid factual position of the pending issue in the L.P.A. aforesaid.
6. Finding substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner especially the fact that no purpose would be served by continued detention of the said vehicle, let referred vehicle be released in favour of the petitioner by way of ad interim custody on execution of surety bond of Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lacs), not in the form of cash/Bank Guarantee, along with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned authority with condition that the petitioner would not dispose of the said vehicle without permission of the authority concerned and shall produce as and when required by the Court. Further proceeding of Confiscation Case, if any, shall remain stayed till disposal of the L.P.A. aforesaid. This order shall be subject to the result of the L.P.A. aforesaid.
7. With the aforesaid observation, this writ application stands disposed of.
(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date15.12.2017 Transmission Date 15.12.2017