Dr. AIJAZ AHMED vs THE STATE
This criminal revision application was filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing an application under Section 516-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 for the return of a vehicle involved in a criminal case. The core legal question concerned the custody and release on superdginama of a car seized by the police during an investigation where it was allegedly used by a renter in a police encounter. The Sindh High Court held that since the vehicle had already been examined by the Forensic Science Laboratory and was deteriorating at the police station while no challan had been submitted against the applicant owner, the impugned order should be set aside. The Court laid down the principle that a rightful owner not implicated in the main offense is entitled to the interim custody of their vehicle on a superdginama, subject to adequate surety and conditions ensuring the vehicle's condition is maintained and cooperation with the police is sustained.
- Whether the interim custody of a seized vehicle can be granted to its registered owner on a superdginama during pending investigation?
- Does keeping a seized vehicle parked indefinitely at a police station justify its release to prevent destruction?
- Can a vehicle be released on superdginama when no challan has been submitted against its owner?
- Section 516-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' DR. QAMMARUDDIN BOHRA, J.---(1) Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.
3. This criminal revision application has been filed as the applicant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order, dated 14-5-2008 passed by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge Karachi East in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.459 of 2008 filed under section 516-A, Cr.P.0 whereby learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the application and hence this revision.
' Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the car in question is owned by the applicant who rented out the same to Khalid Tanoli which has been subsequently used in the police encounter wherein fire has been exchanged between the police and culprits which resulted the death of one police personnel and official SMG was snatched. Learned counsel contended that the applicant being the sole owner of the car and there is no fault on his part as he is running business of rental car in the name and style of Driver in Associates and he rented out the car in question to the said Khalid Tanoli on 24-3-2008 who had to return the car on 2-4-2008 but in the meantime above incident mentioned in the F.I.R. Taken place. On the application report was called from the Investigation Officer and moreover the applicant fully cooperated with the I.O. And pointed out the house of guarantor Sudheer Shah who was arrested by the I.O. Learned counsel further pointed out that the vehicle has been examined by the FSL and other legal formalities have been completed by the I.O. And now investigation agency not required the vehicle in question. Lastly it was contended by the learned counsel that the vehicle in question is a source of earning bread for the family of the applicant.
Learned State Counsel admitted that so far as no challan has been submitted against the applicant, only objection has been raised if the car is handed over to the applicant he will change its condition.
' The above contentions do not have any force as vehicle was examined by FSL cell and the car is lying at the Police Station since 31-3-2008 and there are chances that vehicle will be destroyed there.
' In the above circumstances, the impugned order is set aside let the vehicle be returned to the applicant on the Superdginama on the satisfaction of the trial Court in the sum of Rs.10,00,000 (Rupees Ten Lacs) and with further direction to the applicant to cooperate the police in investigation of the case if they required and further direction the condition of the vehicle should not be changed till disposal of the case.
' Criminal revision application stands disposed of.