MUHAMMAD SHAHID Versus State
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 challenging the dismissal of his revision petition by the Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, which had upheld the Judicial Magistrate's order refusing to release a seized Toyota Land Cruiser on Superdari. The vehicle was seized under Section 550 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and a Forensic Science Laboratory report indicated its chassis number was cut and welded. The core legal question was whether a vehicle with a disputed chassis number, not claimed as stolen or involved in any other criminal case, should be released to a bona fide purchaser on Superdari pending further inquiry. The Lahore High Court held that keeping the vehicle in police custody indefinitely would cause its deterioration, and since the petitioner appeared to be a bona fide purchaser with transfer documents from the Excise Department and no rival claimant existed, the vehicle should be released on Superdari. The court laid down the principle that property not established as stolen or involved in a crime ought not to be detained indefinitely in police custody to prevent decay, subject to appropriate surety bonds and restrictions against alienation pending final determination of its genuineness.
- Whether a vehicle with a tampered chassis number can be released on Superdari to a bona fide purchaser when it is not proven to be stolen or involved in another criminal case?
- Can police retain seized property indefinitely under Section 550 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 without proof of it being stolen property?
- What conditions should be imposed when granting Superdari of a vehicle whose chassis number requires further forensic probe?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 550, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. M. BILAL KHAN, J.--- Muhammad Shahid son of Haji Ghulam Mustafa, the petitioner, by filing this petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. has called in question the order dated 23-1-2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, whereby he had dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 15-12-2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Lahore dismissing his application for obtaining the vehicle Toyota Jeep (Land Cruiser) No.BC/5891, Model 1990, Chassis No.HZJ 75-0002086 and Engine No.IHZ-0033771 on Superdari.
2. Precisely the facts giving rise to this constitutional petition are -that the petitioner claimed to be bona fide purchaser of the aforementioned vehicle, which had been seized by Mehdi Hassan, S.-I. Police AVLS, Gulberg, Lahore under section 550, Cr.P.C.; that the said vehicle was got examined from- the Forensic Science Laboratory which had reported that its chassis number had been cut and welded; that the petitioner moved an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Model Town, Lahore Superdari of the said vehicle but his plea had been turned down with the observation that the ownership of the present petitioner qua the vehicle in question was doubtful. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed a revision petition. before the Court of Session, at Lahore, which had been dismissed ? by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore vide order dated 23-1-2007. Hence the instant petition.
3. Release of the aforesaid vehicle on Superdari is being sought by the petitioner on the grounds that he is a bona fide purchaser and owner of the vehicle having bought the same from one Ghulam Shah son of Asghar Shah for an amount of Rs.14,00,000; Ghulam Shah in his turn had purchased the vehicle in question from Abdul Samad son of Abdul Hakim; the certificate of registration, a copy whereof has been appended with this petition, as Annex-'A' bears all the necessary endorsements and that seizure of the vehicle under section 550, Cr.P.C. was illegal; that neither is there any rival claimant of the vehicle in question nor is the same involved in any , criminal case. Reliance in this regard has been placed on Mahboob Khan v. The State (2003 YLR 791).
4. The learned Law Officer appearing on behalf of the State, however, did not seriously oppose the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that admittedly there is nothing on record to show that ? the vehicle in question is stolen property or is involved in any criminal case except the report of Forensic Science Laboratory, that the chassis number thereof had been rigged.
5. After hearing the earned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Law Officer and going through the documents appended with this petition, it has straightaway been observed that the vehicle in question is neither stolen property nor is the same involved in any criminal case. The documents thereof are properly maintained by the petitioner. The only question as to the chassis number, which is alleged to have been "cut and welded", is a matter which needs further probe. The petitioner for the time being appears to be a bona fide purchaser of the vehicle in question and the Excise Department had also transferred the vehicle in his name on 3-11-2006. There is no other claimant of the vehicle for the time being. It has further been observed that retention of the vehicle in question in police possession for an indefinite period would mean nothing but complete decay, deterioration and .damage thereto which cannot be allowed under any provision of law.
6. For the foregoing reasons, I accept this petition and direct that the vehicle in question be .handed over to the. petitioner on Superdari subject to his. furnishing surety bond in the sum of Rs.14,00,0.00 to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate with the further direction to the petitioner not to sell an transfer the same till the decision of its genuineness by the competent forum. However, this order will not prejudice the rights of a rival claimant, if any, with better title. No order as to costs.
7. H.B.T./M-416/L ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.