Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106698 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19893 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Dubey,Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. The instant application has been preferred for quashing order dated 09.05.2025 passed by Session Judge, Chandauli in Criminal Revision no. 62 of 2025 (Deepak Kumar vs. State of U.P.) as well as order dated 13.03.2024 passed by District Magistrate, Chandauli in Case no. 869 of 2023 (State vs. Shilu Yadav and others) u/s 5(A) of Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, both arising out in Case Crime no. 132 of 2023 under Section 3/5A/5B/8 of Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act, 11 Criminal Cruelty Act, PS- Saiyadraja, District Chandauli. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has no knowledge about the fact that the act committed by driver of his vehicle is illegal, whereas in the instant matter, he has already been extended anticipatory bail during trial. It is further submitted that relevant documents has been brought on record, which shows that the applicant is owner of vehicle in question, i.e., DCM bearing no. UP83T6870 and no useful purpose shall be served by way of keeping the vehicle in question at police station concerned. However, the said vehicle has been seized vide order dated 13.03.2024 passed by District Magistrate, Chandauli. Being aggrieved with order dated 13.03.2024, applicant preferred revision, but the same has also been dismissed vide impugned order dated 09.05.2025. 4. Referring to aforesaid facts as well as contents of F.I.R. as also the impugned orders, it is submitted that detention of the vehicle for a long time at the police station is likely to diminish its value and ultimately the vehicle may become junk. Placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble the Apex Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, 2003 (1) JIC 615 (SC), it is submitted that the Apex Court has held that "In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles." It is lastly submitted that applicant is willing to fulfill all conditions imposed upon him for release of the vehicle in question. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submitted that since vehicle in question was related to the applicant, who has been implicated in pursuance to sections of U.P. Excise Act, the competent authorities while rejecting the release application have not committed any illegality. Impugned orders does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully, wherein it is submitted at Bar by learned counsel for applicant that applicant has already been granted anticipatory bail, copy of bail order is annexed as Annexure no. 6 to the affidavit. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 09.05.2025 passed by Session Judge, Chandauli in Criminal Revision no. 62 of 2025 (Deepak Kumar vs. State of U.P.) as well as order dated 13.03.2024 passed by District Magistrate, Chandauli in Case no. 869 of 2023 (State vs. Shilu Yadav and others), are hereby set-aside. The authority concerned is hereby directed to release the vehicle in shape of DCM bearing no. UP83T6870 in favour of its registered owner, i.e., applicant subject to deposition of entire market value of vehicle in question as surety before authority concerned before release, subject to following terms and conditions as mentioned below :- (i) The applicant shall produce the vehicle in question as and when the learned concerned court will require during trial of aforementioned case crime number. (ii) The applicant shall not put for sale the vehicle in question by transferring the same to any third party. (iii) The applicant shall also not change the nature and color of the vehicle in question in any manner during pendency of said case crime number. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad