Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mohammad Shameer, owner of a lorry bearing registration No. KA-19-AB-0011, filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenging an order dated 01.02.2019 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in Crl.Misc. No.130/2019. The Sessions Court had allowed the petitioner's application under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC for release of the vehicle but imposed a condition that the petitioner furnish a renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the trial court. The petitioner contended that this condition was onerous and unreasonable. The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, presided over by Justice B.A. Patil, heard the matter. The court observed that while the Sessions Court had the discretion to impose conditions for release of seized property, the condition of furnishing a bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle was excessive and not justified. The court held that the purpose of interim custody is to preserve the property and ensure its production when required, and that a simple bond or security would suffice. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the onerous condition, and directed the release of the vehicle on the petitioner furnishing a simple bond for the value of the vehicle or such other reasonable security as the trial court may deem fit.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Interim Custody of Vehicle - Sections 451, 457 CrPC - Condition of Bank Guarantee - The Sessions Court allowed release of seized lorry on condition of furnishing renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle - Held that such condition is onerous and not warranted; the court should impose reasonable conditions to secure the vehicle's production and prevent misuse - The High Court set aside the condition and directed release on simple bond (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the condition imposed by the Sessions Court requiring the petitioner to furnish a renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle for its interim release under Sections 451 and 457 of CrPC is legal and proper.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the condition of furnishing renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle, and directed the release of the vehicle on the petitioner furnishing a simple bond for the value of the vehicle or such other reasonable security as the trial court may deem fit.
Law Points
- Interim custody of vehicle
- Section 451 CrPC
- Section 457 CrPC
- condition of bank guarantee
- onerous condition
- release of seized property
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (10) 38
Criminal Revision Petition No.988/2019
Sri Rajesh Rai K., Advocate for Sri Chandrahasa Rai B., Advocate (for petitioner); Sri M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP (for respondents)
State of Karnataka, Mines and Geology Department; Mr. Niranjan A.M.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition challenging condition imposed for release of seized vehicle under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought setting aside of the condition requiring furnishing of renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle for its release.
Filing Reason
The Sessions Court allowed release of the vehicle but imposed an onerous condition of bank guarantee double the value, which the petitioner challenged as unreasonable.
Previous Decisions
The Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in Crl.Misc. No.130/2019 dated 01.02.2019 allowed the application for release subject to the condition of furnishing renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle.
Issues
Whether the condition of furnishing a renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle for its interim release is legal and proper under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the condition of bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle is onerous and unreasonable.
Respondent State supported the condition as necessary to secure the vehicle.
Ratio Decidendi
The condition of furnishing a bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle for interim release under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC is onerous and not warranted; the court should impose reasonable conditions to secure the vehicle's production and prevent misuse, such as a simple bond.
Judgment Excerpts
This petition has been filed by the petitioner-owner of the vehicle challenging the order passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.130/2019 dated 1.2.2019, whereunder the application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. is allowed by imposing some conditions, whereunder the vehicle bearing registration No.KA.19 AB.0011 is ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner-RC Owner on his furnishing security in the form of renewable Bank Guarantee double the value of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the Court below.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed an application under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru for release of his seized lorry. The Sessions Court allowed the application on 01.02.2019 but imposed a condition of furnishing renewable bank guarantee double the value of the vehicle. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present criminal revision petition under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 397, 401, 451, 457
