- (1.) C. A. Rahim, J. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the State.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel and Sri Syed Mahmood, A. G. A. both sides have agreed for hearing of the case at this stage. HEARD both sides. The dispute is of over a Maruli Van which is alleged to have been used in com mitting the murder for which a case under Section 302 I. P. C. has been started. The en tire exercise of the lower court was that the report lodged by the petitioner Tej Veer Singh was collusive and hence he is not entitled to get back the Maruti van as prayed for. Even if it is assumed at this stage that the said Maruti van was used for the purpose of committing murder the prosecution at the best can claim that it should be produced in evidence without changing the colour and number plate. The reason for detaining the said Maruti van for any other purpose has not ben disclosed in any of the judgments. I do not consider that without considering that aspect of the matter the alamat proper ty which is required to be produced in evidence can be kept in detention in a police station. The only consequence would be that it would be damaged in rain and sun. Considering all relevant aspects I find merit in this application and the same is allowed. It is directed that the Maruti Van No. Dl-3 CB 7707 be released in favour of the registered owner on executing a bond of 2,00,000 (Rs. two lacs) with one surety to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicia 1 Magistrate, Mathura on condition that the registered owner of the vehicle shall not change the colour and number till the disposal of the case and will be liable to produce the same before the trial court on being requisitioned for the said purpose.
(3.) WITH the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of. W. P. disposed of. .;