Final Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. SEEMA MAINI
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
NORTH DISTRICT: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
CNR No. DLNT01-000712-2024
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd.
(Through its A.R. Sh. Neeraj Pandey)
Company Incorporated under the provisions of
Company’s Act, 1956
Reg. Office: 19-A, Dhuleshwar Garden,
Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
And Delhi Office at:
186, Patparganj Industrial Area,
Anand Vihar Road,
Delhi-110091.
Branch Office at:
408, 4th Floor, Pearl Height-I,
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, Delhi-110034
…..Revisionist
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi)
….Respondent
Date of filing : 18.01.2024
Date of arguments : 12.02.2024
Date of Order : 14.02.2024
O R D E R
Vide the instant revision petition, the revisional
jurisdiction of this court has been invoked u/s 397 CrPC, assailing
the order of the Ld. Trial Court dated 10.03.2023 vide which, the
Ld. Trial Court, disposed off the application for release of vehicle
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No. 1 of 5
-- 1 of 5 --
bearing No. DL1LAA-1993 on superdari, moved on behalf of
revisionist-herein (AU Small Financed Bank Ltd.), which was
seized in case FIR no. 319/2020 PS Narela u/s 279/338 IPC.
2. The facts in brief, relevant for disposal of this revision,
and as laid out in the TCR, which has been called for, are to the
effect that the vehicle i.e. Mahendra Bolero Maxi Truck PLU
bearing registration No. DL-1L-AA-1993, was seized by the IO
concerned in case FIR No. 319/2020 u/s 279/338 IPC PS Narela.
Though, the said vehicle is in the name of Bikram Singh, accused
before the Ld. Trial Court, it was hypothecated to the AU Small
Finance Bank (revisionist-herein), who moved an application for
releasing the said vehicle on superdari to them. The Ld. Trial Court
called for a report from the IO concerned, and after receipt of the
report, passed the impugned order dt.10.03.2023 that in view of the
said report, the said application stands disposed off.
3. The revisionist has assailed the impugned order dated
10.03.2023 on the ground that Mr. Bikram Singh, who is the
registered owner of the said vehicle, approached the revisionist bank
for grant of loan facility to purchase the said vehicle, and a loan was
disbursed to him by the revisionist bank, to be repaid in 54 EMIs
vide agreement dt. 29.01.2018. However, after receipt of the loan,
the registered owner failed to repay the monthly loan installments
and other dues, and as per the said agreement dt.29.01.2018, the
revisionist bank is entitled to repossess the aforesaid hypothecated
vehicle. The said vehicle has been falsely implicated in the said
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No. 2 of 5
-- 2 of 5 --
case, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the said
vehicle in police custody as the proceedings of the case shall take a
long time. The revisionist bank is ready to furnish the surety bond,
and shall not change the colour or sell out the said vehicle till
passing of the final order in the said case. The revisionist has prayed
that the impugned order dt. 10.03.2023, be set aside, and to direct
the IO / SHO concerned to release the said vehicle on superdari to
the revisionist.
4. I have heard the arguments extended by Sh. H.C. Sharma,
Ld. Counsel for the revisionist and Sh. Ravi Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP
(substitute) for the State / respondent, and I have also perused the
record and have also scrutinized the documents, which are present
in the trial court record and have considered the rival contentions
put forth by the parties, gone through the relevant provisions of law,
and the case law, which has been cited on behalf of the revisionist.
5. I have gone through the impugned order dt.10.03.2023,
and I cannot restrain myself from observing that it is one of the most
cryptic order that I have ever read. The impugned order reads as
under:
“Present: Dr. Deepak Saini, Ld. APP for the State.
Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
Report received. Copy supplied.
In view of the same, present application stands
disposed off”.
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No. 3 of 5
-- 3 of 5 --
In a common parlance, the said order means that no
further hearing on the application is required. However, what was
the order i.e. whether the application was allowed or dismissed, is
not clear from the word “Disposed Off”. Interestingly, the report,
which was given by the IO, is to the effect that the vehicle was
being plied on the road without valid insurance or the fitness
certificate, and therefore, it may not be released.
6. Noteworthy, it is that, as per the IO, the vehicle is not
required for any further investigation by the IO. If the vehicle was
being plied without the requisite insurance and fitness certificate,
the accused should have been charge-sheeted for the relevant
offences under the Motor Vehicle Act also, which the IO does not
seem to have done. However, why the vehicle needs to be kept in
the Malkhana in perpetuity, is beyond this court’s comprehension.
The Ld. Trial Court did not bother to look into this factum, and has
merely accepted the report of the IO on its face value, and thereafter,
passed the impugned order, which in itself, is ambiguous.
7. In these circumstance, I am of the opinion that the
impugned order dt. 10.03.2023 suffers from an infirmity as it is a
non-speaking order. The impugned order dt. 10.03.2023 is set aside.
Accordingly, the instant revision petition is disposed off, and the
matter is remanded back, with direction to the Ld. Trial Court, to
hear the arguments of the applicant / revisionist afresh, and pass a
speaking order, while disposing off the application for relese of the
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No. 4 of 5
-- 4 of 5 --
said vehicle on Superdari.
8. Nothing expressed herein, shall tantamount, to any
expression on the merits of the case. The Ld. Trial Court shall hear
the matter, as per law, without being influenced by any observations,
made in this order.
9. The revisionist is directed to appear before the Ld. Trial
Court on 17.02.2024.
10. Trial Court Record be sent back along with a copy of this
order. The revision petition file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court
today i.e. 14th February 2024
(Seema Maini)
Principal District & Sessions Judge (North)
Rohini Courts, Delhi
CR No. 10/2024
AU Small Financed Bank Ltd. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No. 5 of 5
-- 5 of 5 --