IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8450/2017 BETWEEN:
B. K. REKHA W/O RAJU K AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.25 G KEBBALI VILLAGE GOWDAGERE POST KERAGODU HOBLI MANDYA TALUK MANDYA PIN-541 103 REP BY GPA HOLDER SRI PRATHAP G S S/O SIDDALINGAIAH RESIDING AT GANNUR VILLAGE KYLANCHA POST AND HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK - 534 104.
(BY SRI LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HASSAN CITY POLICE STATION HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN ... PETITIONER REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-01 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI S. RACHAIAH, HCGP.) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S. 482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2017 PASSED ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 457 OF CR.P.C. IN CR.NO.184/2017 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., HASSAN AND CONFIRMED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN CRL.RP.NO.184/2017 DATED 10.10.2017, AND RELEASE THE VEHICLE BEARING NO. KA-05-TR- 4724:2013-14 ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner who sought for release of the seized Mercedes Benz ‘E’ class car bearing No.KA- 05/TR/4724, 2013-14 (Chassis No.WDD2120026L032289 and Engine No.65192431477484) has suffered an order of rejection of the said application by order dated 03.02.2017, which has been confirmed in revision petition by order dated 10.10.2017 is seeking for quashing of said orders, the petitioner is before this Court.
2. I have heard Sri Lakshmikanth K., learned counsel for petitioner and Sri S. Rachaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State. Perused the records.
3. Petitioner who claims to be the registered owner of the seized vehicle filed an application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. for release of the said vehicle through power of attorney holder.
4. It is the contention of Sri Lakshmikanth K., learned counsel for the petitioner that the said vehicle belongs to the petitioner herein – applicant and she is the registered owner as per the certificate issued by the jurisdictional Regional Transport Office and detention of said vehicle by the police authority would lead to value of the vehicle being deteriorated for not being put into use. Therefore, he seeks for release of the vehicle.
5. Per contra, learned Government Pleader supports the impugned orders.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records, it would disclose that one Mr.Sumanth, lodged a complaint with the jurisdictional police that one Sri Raju Gowda, had induced the complainant to deposit certain amounts in the Society in which the said Raju Gowda was working and after having deposited the said amount, Raju Gowda is said to have closed the Society and escaped with the entire amount deposited by the complainant and similarly placed persons. Hence, complainant sought for action being taken against the said Raju Gowda and said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.295/2016. During the course of investigation, Mercedes Benz ‘E’ Class car bearing registration No.KA-51-MD-2889 came to be seized under P.F.No.147/2016 on 02.12.2016 from Raju Gowda. Said Raju Gowda is none other than husband of the petitioner herein, who is the applicant for the vehicle in question. In order to ascertain as to whether the vehicle which had been seized by the jurisdictional police under P.F.No.147/2016 is having the same engine and chassis number of the vehicle bearing registration No.KA-05/TR-4724/2013-14. Learned High Court Government Pleader was directed to ascertain the same from the jurisdictional police. He has submitted before this Court that engine and chassis number are one and the same. Thus, the contention of the applicant that accused has changed the registration number is within the proximity of truth and what has been contended by the petitioner – applicant. The vehicle in question which is owned by the petitioner – applicant if allowed to be detained in the police station or in an open place, quite naturally the value of the vehicle would come down and it would not be in the interest of the parties to allow the value of the vehicle being deteriorated. As such, this Court is of the opinion that with stringent conditions being put for releasing the vehicle, it would suffice and protect the interest of the prosecution also.
7. Hence, Criminal Petition is allowed.
Application filed under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. for release of the vehicle seized under P.F.No.147/2016 bearing Chassis No.WDD2120026L032289 and Engine No.65192431477484 is allowed and it is ordered that vehicle in question be released in favour of the petitioner or her authorised representative subject to following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall execute an indemnity bond for the value of the vehicle of Rs.30,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
2. Petitioner or her authorised representative shall produce the said vehicle once in 15 days before the jurisdictional police for inspection and certification till completion of trial and shall not be sold till completion of proceedings or without expressed permission from jurisdictional Court.
3. Photographs of the said vehicle containing the engine and chassis number shall be taken out by the jurisdictional police and shall be furnished to the jurisdictional Court before release of the vehicle seized under P.F.No.147/2016.
SD/- JUDGE nvj