Ajithkumar vs Commissioner Of Police, Thrissur City, Thrissur

Mary Joseph, J

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is an NRI businessman who purchased a 2017 model motor car

bearing Registration No.KL-46 Q1347 having hypothecation with HDFC Thrissur Branch from the 4th respondent for a consideration of Rs.2,02,000/-

. The true copy of the transaction receipts are produced alongwith the petition on hand as Ext.P1. It is submitted by the petitioner that at the time of

purchase of the car, he was told by the 4th respondent that only a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- is due to the 5th respondent. But in the enquiry made it was

made known to the petitioner that the sum actually due to the 5th respondent is Rs.22,00,000/-.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that petitioner was a bonafide purchaser and he is agreeable to pay the actual dues to the 5th respondent. His

only grievance was that the vehicle seized is not produced before the court till date and therefore, it has become impracticable for him to approach the

court and to apply for getting custody of the vehicle. Accordingly, a direction is sought to the authorities of the police station concerned who has seized

the vehicle to produce it before the Jurisdictional Court so as to enable him to apply for its release.

Sri.P.Satheesan, the learned Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent has contended that the vehicle has been hypothecated to the Bank and

without the knowledge of the Bank that it has been transferred to the petitioner by the 4th respondent. According to him large amount is due to the

Bank as loan arrears.

This Court finds that even if the vehicle is not produced before the court, the petitioner could move an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. before

the court for getting the vehicle released. But as the matter stands, an adjudication to find out the real claimant is inevitable since the vehicle stands

hypothecated to the 5th respondent by the 4th respondent and it was transferred in favour of the petitioner during the subsistence of the loan

arrangement. At this juncture, it is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner proposes to move an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C

before the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

In the result, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent not to release the vehicle to any person

approaching the police station with a claim over it without the matter being adjudicated and decided by the Jurisdictional Magistrate.