Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Madras High Court recently allowed a vehicle owner to get her seized car released which was allegedly used by her friends to commit robbery.

"The petitioner is not an accused in the said case. If the vehicle is kept in open place, unused for a long period its value will definitely get diminished. This Court is of the considered view that the interests of justice will be served, if the vehicle is ordered to be released to the petitioner on certain conditions...", a single judge bench has ordered.

In the instant case, the vehicle, a Maruti Brezza was seized by the police on the ground that the said vehicle was used for the commission of offence under Section 397 IPC.

By way of the impugned order District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate had concluded that if said car was handed over to the owner, she might alter its nature and fail to produce the vehicle at the time of trial and chose to dismiss the application.

Advocate Praveen K Joy, for the owner, contended before the High Court that if the vehicle is kept without use, its value will be diminished.

Justice R Kalaimathi relied on Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat wherein Supreme court held that it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police station for a long period and it is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate order immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the vehicles if required at any point of time. 

It accordingly allowed release of the car on execution of a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and on the undertaking that the owner will not use the vehicle in question for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as and when required by the state authorities.

Case Title: Nasoona vs. The State represented by The Inspector of Police