Prakash Barik vs. State Of Odisha

Facts

The Petitioner, Prakash Barik, representing Nagar Export (P) Ltd., filed a criminal revision petition challenging the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the J.M.F.C., Barbil. The Magistrate had rejected the Petitioner's application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for the release of seized M.S. scraps and a cutting loader. The seized items were confiscated in connection with Barbil P.S.Case No.110 of 2021 (G.R.Case No.379 of 2021), with the Magistrate noting that the matter was before the Deputy Commissioner of CT & GST, Barbil, regarding penalty. The Petitioner contended that the seized materials were loaded onto a truck but were detained by the police on suspicion of being stolen. The Petitioner argued that the materials were deteriorating due to exposure to the elements while in police custody and cited a precedent for interim release.

Held

The High Court allowed the criminal revision petition, setting aside the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Barbil. The Court held that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the seized materials in the custody of the Barbil Police Station, exposed to the elements. The Court reasoned that the deterioration of the goods would lead to damage and loss. Therefore, the Court directed the interim release of the seized scrap and cutting loader in favour of the person from whom it was seized, upon proper identification. An undertaking was to be obtained from the Petitioner that the vehicle would be produced before the trial court as and when required for the purpose of the trial. The ratio decidendi is that seized goods prone to deterioration should be released on interim custody to prevent loss, even if GST proceedings are pending, provided an undertaking for production is furnished.

Key Issues

1. Whether the learned J.M.F.C., Barbil, was justified in rejecting the application for interim release of seized M.S. scraps and cutting loader under Section 457 Cr.P.C., considering the potential damage to the goods and the pendency of proceedings before the GST authorities? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on Section 457 Cr.P.C. and principles of interim custody of seized goods). Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that the seized M.S. scraps and cutting loader were deteriorating due to exposure to sun and rain while in police custody, leading to potential damage and financial loss. They relied on the case of Ashis Ranjan Mohanty(Adv) v. State of Odisha and others (2022(i) OLR 555) where this Court directed interim release of seized materials. The Petitioner prayed for the interim release of the seized items in their favour. Revenue's Arguments: The learned counsel for the State raised an objection to the Petitioner's prayer for interim release of the seized scraps and cutting loader.