2014 (7) TMI 1298 - HC - Indian Laws

Jurisdiction - power of Inspector General of Police of the Division/Commissioner of Police concerned of the cities/Superintendent of Police of the District concerned to check the activities of each and every police station - HELD THAT - Let the Superintendent of Police or officer equivalent thereto conduct fresh inspection of the activities of each and every police station with respect to the disposal of the seized vehicles and submit a report before the next date of hearing. The report shall also indicate the condition of the Malkhanas. List on 8th August, 2014.

Summary

Issues:
1. Clarifications required from the respondent regarding the disposal of seized vehicles and case properties.
2. Compliance with directions given by the Supreme Court in General Insurance Council v. State of A.P. and Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai v. State of Gujarat.
3. Status report indicating the number and condition of properties in police custody.
4. Inspection of police stations for disposal of seized vehicles and condition of Malkhanas.
5. Directions needed for the disposal of various types of seized articles beyond vehicles, currency, liquor, and drugs.

Analysis:
1. The case was listed for directions due to the need for clarifications from the respondent regarding the disposal of seized vehicles and case properties. The Supreme Court's directions in General Insurance Council v. State of A.P. emphasized the responsibility of police officials in checking the activities of each police station for proper disposal of seized vehicles to prevent decay and theft of valuable parts. Similarly, in Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai v. State of Gujarat, the Magistrate was directed to ensure prompt disposal of case properties within a specified time frame.

2. The status report presented by the Delhi Police revealed a significant number of properties, including vehicles, in their custody, with a substantial portion being deemed not roadworthy or left unattended on roads/public places. The court sought information on whether the responsible officers identified in the Supreme Court's directions were overseeing the disposal of case properties, prompt production before the Magistrate, and the submission of disposal applications by the SHO/IO to the relevant courts.

3. To address the issues raised, the court directed the Superintendent of Police or equivalent officer to conduct fresh inspections of all police stations regarding the disposal of seized vehicles and report on the condition of Malkhanas. Additionally, the petitioner highlighted the need for directions on the disposal of various seized articles beyond vehicles, currency, liquor, and drugs, such as arms, ammunitions, and crime weapons. The State assured the submission of a comprehensive list of seized articles for further consideration.

4. The court scheduled the next hearing for August 8, 2014, and ordered the distribution of the order to the parties' counsel for compliance. The comprehensive approach taken by the court aimed to ensure the proper implementation of directives from previous judgments and address the challenges related to the disposal of seized properties in police custody effectively.