Power Conferred U/S 451 CrPC Should Be Exercised With Judicious Mind & Without Unnecessary Delay: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court observed that a trial court should exercise the power conferred under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. with a judicious mind and without any unnecessary delay.
The petitioner, who was the registered owner of a vehicle seized by the police, faced allegations that the confiscated vehicle was involved in cow slaughtering or transporting cows. Subsequently, the magistrate directed police authorities to make a public auction of the seized vehicle.
An F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner under Sections 3, 5, 5kha and 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (the Act) to which he argued that his vehicle was seized in an arbitrary manner and that he did not transport cows for slaughter.
A Single Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed, “So that the litigant may not suffer, merely keeping the article in the custody of the police in the open yard will not fulfil any purpose and ultimately it result the damage of the said property. The owner of the property be allowed to enjoy the fruits of the said property for the remaining period for which the property is being made.”
Advocate Anil Kumar Tiwari represented the petitioner, while AGA Ashok Kumar Singh appeared for the respondents.
Therefore, the Court held that “undisputedly the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized vehicle.”
The Court explained that the procedure contemplated under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. should also be followed promptly so that a trial court can take a prompt decision for the disposal of seized properties.
“Keeping the said property in the custody will not solve any purpose and that gives a mental and financial torture to the owner of the said property which is also against the law and against the principles of natural justice,” the Court noted.
The Court remarked that “no useful purpose will be served in keeping the vehicle stationed at the police station in the open yard for a long period allowing it to be damaged with the passage of time.”
The Court directed the trial court to release the vehicle in question in favour of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Omprakash v. State Of U.P. & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:20201)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Anil Kumar Tiwari
Respondents: AGA Ashok Kumar Singh
