Harsh Kumar, J. - (1.) Affidavit filed on behalf of the revisionist is taken on record. Since A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of opposite parties, no need to issue notices to opposite party nos. 1 & 2, who are State of U.P. and Sub-Inspector of State Police. Heard Shri B.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for revisionist and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 13.06.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Maharajganj in Misc. Case No. 249 of 2016 (State v. Narain Chhetri and others) filed in case crime no. 1114 of 2015, under Section 8/20/23 of the N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Nichlaul, District Maharajganj refusing to release the vehicle Scooty Honda Activa no. UP-56P-3793 in favour of its registered owner, the revisionist.
(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the revisionist is the registered owner of vehicle in question and is not named in the FIR; that the vehicle has been kept in open campus of police station, due to which the same is getting damaged and decayed, diminishing its value; that no offence has been committed by the revisionist or the vehicle and no contrabands were ever recovered from the vehicle in question, rather the recovery has been falsely planted; that the learned Magistrate has acted wrongly with material irregularity in rejecting the release application in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India v. Dinesh Kumar Verma (2005) 9 SCC 330 ; that the judgment of above reported case shows that the order of High Court releasing the vehicle during trial was set aside by Apex Court in view of facts of that case and no principle of law was laid down; that no proceedings for confiscation of vehicle in question were ever initiated or were pending and on account of the provisions of confiscation, if any, the release of vehicle may not be refused; that in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat 2003 (46) ACC 223 , the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the vehicle in question may be released in favour of revisionist; that the revisionist undertakes to abide the conditions, if any, imposed on release of vehicle, and to produce the vehicle, if and when required by the court or confiscating authority.;