IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF MAY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.41/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SMT.JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA A.C. AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 2. PRABHAKARA A.C.
S/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA A.C. AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. RAGHAVENDRA A.C.
S/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA A.C. AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 4. HEMAKUMAR A.C.
S/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA A.C. AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT AMBIGARAHALLI VILLAGE AKKIHEBBALU HOBLI K.R.PET TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 605. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHARATH S.GOWDA, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA STATE BY K.R.PET RURAL POLICE STATION – 571 426. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI MUNIGANGAPPA, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2016 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA IN CR.NO.202/2016, WHEREBY THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 457 OF CR.P.C. FOR INTERIM CUSTODY OF VEHICLE TRACTOR BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-11-T-1891 AND TRACTOR BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-11-T-1892 SEIZED IN PF NO.106/2016 DATED 20.06.2016 IS REJECTED VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO HAND OVER INTERIM CUSTODY OF THE VEHICLES.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED ON 27.04.2017 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioners are assailing the order passed by the Special Judge, Mandya, whereby their application seeking interim custody of the vehicle/Tractor bearing registration No.KA-11/T-1891 and Trailor bearing registration No.KA-11/T-1892, is rejected on the sole ground that the registration certificate of the said vehicle does not stand in the name of the applicants.
2. Sri.Sharath S.Gowda, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the wife and children of deceased A.C.Chandregowda, son of late Dodda Channaiah of Ambigarahalli Village/ the R.C. owner of the vehicle in question. The above said vehicle was seized by the respondent/Police in their Crime No.202/2016 dated 21.6.2016; said case was registered in respect of the offence under Sections 4, 4(1A) and 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rules 42 and 44 of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rues, 1994 and Section 379 of IPC.
3. The Registration Certificate of the vehicle continued in the name of above late A.C.Chandregowda even after his death. To establish that the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased A.C.Chandregowda, the petitioners have produced the Survival Certificate issued by the concerned Deputy Tahsildar. To get the vehicle transferred to the names of the petitioners, it requires physical examination of the vehicle; in view of the seizure of the vehicle, now it is parked in the open yard of the Police Station and it is practically impossible for the petitioners to get the R.C. transferred to their name. The court below without appreciating the above aspect of the matter has mechanically rejected petitioners’ prayer for release of the vehicle for their interim custody.
4. Learned HCGP opposes the petition on the ground that the petitioners are not supported with documentary proof about their ownership of the vehicle.
5. As such, there was no rival claim for the vehicle. When it is shown that R.C. owner of the vehicle is no more, the Trial Court was required to further examine whether or not the petitioners are Class-I legal heirs of he deceased R.C. owner. However, the petitioners had produced Survival Certificate issued by the Revenue Department in support of their claim. Their Election ID and Aadhar Cards, in which the deceased is arrayed as husband of 1st petitioner/father of other petitioners was very much placed on record. It is a fact that a mechanically propelled vehicle when exposed to weather fluctuations, definitely its engine will get rusted and dusted and at the end of the day, not only value is bound to depreciate, it cannot be put to use on the road also.
6. In the above circumstance, it is required to interfere with the order impugned.
The revision petition is allowed. The order dated 30.11.2016 in Crime No.202/2016 of K.T.Pet Rural Police Station, passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mandya, is set aside. The Sessions Court is directed to release the Tractor/Trailor to the interim custody of the petitioners or any authorized Power of Attorney subject to following conditions:
(1) They shall execute indemnity bond to the value to be assessed by the concerned R.T.O. along with one surety for the likesum;
(2) The petitioners/their Power of Attorney shall not part with the custody of the vehicle and shall not transfer or convey the same in favour of third parties until filing of the final report/conclusion of the trial.
(3) They shall not change the colour or structure of the vehicle and shall not use the vehicle for illegal activities.
(4) They shall not deploy the vehicles in identical activities and shall produce the vehicle before the Court whenever called for.
In view of disposal of the main case, I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration, hence, the same stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-