The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No. 4723 of 2023 Rashmi Rao Muduli Petitioner Mr. B. Nayak, Advocate …. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S. Patra, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. 01.
Decision
ORDER 20.12.2023 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court to set aside the impugned order dated 20.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda in Criminal Revision No. 17 of 2023 arising out of CRLMC No. 28 of 2023 corresponding to GR Case No.1153 of 2022 in connection with Khurda Model PS Case No. 350 of 2022 wherein the learned Magistrate, Khurda rejected the prayer of the Petitioner to release the seized vehicle (an Excavator JCB) bearing Regd. No. OD-06-E- 9277. 3. The factual background of the case is that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, STF, CID, CB, Bhubaneswar lodged a written report to the effect that in the intervening night of 15/16.07.2022 at about 3:00 AM having received reliable Page 1 of 4 // 2 // information that one Situ @ Sambit Padhi, S/o- Himansu Mohan Padhi of Forest Colony/BDA Colony, Khurda, Rajendra Prasad Behera, S/o- Rabi Behera of Tarava PS-Dhenkanal and others with criminal conspiracy jointly engaged collecting hard coke and chromite from different persons which have been stored in huge amount inside the premises of their stockyard namely M/s. Barunei Paver Factories owned by Sambit Padhi located at Khurdha Industrial area. It is also alleged in the said report that they have been carrying on the illegal business since last 5 to 6 years and unless immediate raid would be conducted there is every possibility of shifting of the stolen materials and escape of the culprits from the spot as well. He brought the fact to the notice of the authority who entered the same in STF, PS Station Diary vide Entry No. 11 of 2022 and proceed to the spot with a team to take appropriate legal action. Accordingly, with the assistance of two official witnesses, the Informant accompanied with staff and conducted raid. In course of the raid, one person was found present there. On being asked, he disclosed his identity as Rajendra Prasad Behera. He further disclosed that he was working as Manager in the said factory and as per the direction of Situ @ Sambit Padhi and one Pankaj, the persons who are looking after the business of coal and chromite. In course of the search, huge quantity of coal like look and chromites were stored in the premises. On interrogation, the Rajendra Prasad Behera stated that Situ @ Sambit Padhi and one Pankaj are jointly purchasing the hard coke and chromites from some persons and are keeping the same in the premises for trading purposes. The Informant also alleged that both the persons failed to procure produce any authority or documents in support of such illegal Page 2 of 4 // 3 // storing of stolen coal and chromites. The Informant gave requisition to Deputy Director Miens, Cuttack to depute his staff to identify the materials as well as to measure the quantum and its market price and the Deputy Director mines arrived at the spot and identified himself as Dy. Director Mines. After examining the materials he identified the same to be hard coke and chromites. Then he measured the stored materials. In course of the raid one JCB machines bearing Regd. No. OD-05-E-9277 and one ACER Laptop, One HP-1020 printer and cash and Rs.44,500/- was also found at the spot. The Petitioner being the owner of the JCB bearing Registration No. OD-06-E-9277 moved the learned Magistrate in an application under Section 457 of the CrPC for release of the vehicle. The learned Magistrate having considered the application declined to release the same primarily on the ground of no seizure of the vehicle with the registration No. OD-06-E-9277 to have been seized. 4. The Petitioner being aggrieved moved the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Cr. Revision No. 17 of 2023, the learned Additional Sessions Judge having taken the similar view did not agree to release the vehicle. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the I.O. while lodging the report mentioned the vehicle Registration No. of the JCB machine to be OD-05-E-9277 with Engine No. and Chassis No. being the same in respect to the JCB bearing Registration No.OD-06-E-9277. This part of the discrepancy could not be Page 3 of 4 // 4 // reconciled by the learned court below as a result the learned court has arrived at an erroneous conclusion presuming the vehicle No. OD-05-E-9277 being subject matter of seizure, the prayer of the Petitioner in respect to the release of the vehicle bearing Registration No. OD-05-E-9277 cannot be released. 6. This Court perused the documents filed along with the application so also the certificate of Registration in respect to the vehicle bearing Registration No. OD-06-E-9277. A clarification to that effect from the concerned I.O. could have clarified the whole controversy and if it would have been ascertained that the Registration No. mentioned in the FIR is a mistake though the seizure of vehicle bearing OD-06-E-9277 is the subject matter of the entire issue would have been resulted by now. Be that as it may, it is directed that the Petitioner shall move an application afresh clarifying the above aspect and on the motion made to the effect by the Petitioner, the learned court in seisin over the matter shall seek a clarification with respect to the Registration of the seized vehicle along with its Engine and Chassis No. and after its satisfaction that the Engine and Chassis No. so mentioned by the Petitioner if belong to the JCB bearing Registration No.OD-06-E-9277 shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. Judge (Chittaranjan Dash) AKPradhan Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ANANTA KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Sr. Steno Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 22-Dec-2023 17:29:36 Page 4 of 4