228.26revn (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.228 OF 2026 Kalu Babasaheb Munjal VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, thr. Superintendent of Police, Ahilyanagar 2. The Police Investigating Officer, Shrirampur Taluka Police Station, Tq. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahilyanagar ….. Mr Majit S. Shaikh, Advocate for Applicant Ms B. B. Gunjal, APP for Respondents/State ….. CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. DATE : 07th SEPTEMBER 2026 P. C. : 1. By this criminal revision application filed under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant is challenging the impugned order dated 21/07/2026, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, District Ahilyanagar, wherein his application for interim custody of vehicle filed under Section 501 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for releasing his vehicle, came to be rejected. The applicant is further praying for releasing his vehicle in his favour. 2. Applicant is the owner of a Tractor bearing registration No.MH-17-CR-3422. The said tractor was allegedly used by the son 2026:BHC-AUG:42058 228.26revn (2) of the applicant, namely, Laxmikant Kalu Munjal in Crime No. 528/2025. The said crime came to be registered with Shrirampur Taluka Police Station, Shrirampur, Dist. Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 132, 352, 351(2)(3), 121(1)(2), 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; under Sections 3 and 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and under Sections 39, 192(1), and 3/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 3. The aforesaid crime came to be registered on the basis of report lodged by Police Constable Ajit Ashok Patare on 25/12/2025 at about 3:41 p.m at Kamlapur, Taluka Shrirampur on the ground that accused Laxmikant Kalu Munjal (son of applicant) has driven the tractor over the person of the complainant and the Head Constable Pralhad Salve, causing serious injuries to them. The complainant and the said Head Constable Pralhad Salve were conducting an inquiry as regards theft of sand, which was found in the trolley of the said tractor, without a valid transit pass. The son of the applicant was driving the tractor without license. He had not submitted any documents regarding the sand, and while the complainant and Head Constable Pralhad Salve were investigating the case, at that time, son of the applicant allegedly has driven this tractor on them, causing them serious injuries. 228.26revn (3) 4. In pursuance of the aforesaid incident, the FIR bearing C.R.No.528/2025 came to be registered immediately, and the son of the applicant, namely Laxmikant, came to be arrested. The vehicle i.e. tractor along with its trolley, came to be seized in front of the two panchas. The trolley of the said vehicle was filled with sand. The further investigation was conducted. The clothes of the accused as well as the complainant came to be seized. The statements of the witnesses came to be recorded. The medical certificate of the injured also came to be obtained. After completing investigation, the charge- sheet came to be filed against the accused under the aforesaid sections. Later on, the son of the applicant came to be released on bail. Even the trolley in question, which was attached to the tractor also came to be handed over to the applicant. However, the tractor which is seized by the police, is currently lying idle at the police station which was referred to be handed over to applicant. Therefore, the applicant has filed this revision application. 5. Heard learned Advocate Mr Shaikh for the applicant and learned APP Ms Gunjal for respondent/State. 6. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant, being the owner of the said tractor, has approached to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, for releasing the said 228.26revn (4) vehicle on Supradnama in Special Case No.11/2026 by filing application under Section 501 of the BNSS. However, learned Sessions Court rejected his application vide the impugned order dated 21/07/2026. 7. Learned Advocate for the applicant then submits that the applicant produced the documents pointing out his ownership as regards the tractor before the learned Sessions Court. He further submits that, the tractor is essential for his agricultural work and the transportation of agricultural produce. He then submits that the applicant’s livelihood depends entirely upon the said tractor and learned Sessions Court has not considered this while passing the impugned order. He further submits that, if the said vehicle is not released, the applicant will suffer irreparable loss, making it extremely difficult for him to meet his day-to-day expenses. He further submits that, if the vehicle is released, same shall be produced as and when required and directed by the learned Court. He, therefore, submits that this revision application may be allowed and the vehicle of the applicant may be directed to be released. 8. Per contra, learned APP submits that the vehicle is used in the crime. The sessions trial is still pending. The vehicle, if released, 228.26revn (5) may not be made available by the accused, if required by the Trial Court in its proceedings, in future. The accused, who is son of the applicant, is having previous antecedents, and he is committing similar offences again and again. Thus, the learned APP strongly opposes the instant revision application and prays for rejection of the same. 9. After hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and going through the material placed before this Court, I have come to the conclusion that, since the vehicle in question is lying idle at the police station, and it is in nobody's interest for it to remain there idle, it can be safely directed to be released in favour of the applicant. A tractor is an essential vehicle for every agriculturist, as their day-to-day expenses depend entirely upon the income derived from it. With regard to the objection raised by the learned APP, strict conditions can be imposed upon the applicant for the purpose of releasing the vehicle, thereby ensuring its availability, if required by the Trial Court in the future. Even otherwise, the vehicle was allegedly used by the son of the applicant, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents. It must also be noted that the applicant has undertaken to produce the vehicle in future, as and when required, if it is released. Hence, on the same conditions, the instant application deserves to be allowed by putting strict conditions. Hence, I pass the following order :- 228.26revn (6) ORDER (I) The criminal revision application is allowed. (II) The impugned order dated 21/07/2026, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, District Ahilyanagar, is hereby quashed and set aside. (III) The vehicle (Tractor) bearing registration No. MH-17- CR-3422 be released on executing a P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- in favour of the applicant. (IV) The applicant shall furnish undertaking before the Trial Court that, as and when directed and required by the Trial Court, he shall produce the said vehicle. The applicant shall also undertake that he shall not sell, change or alter the nature or structural design of the vehicle. It is also to be submitted by the applicant in the form of undertaking that the said vehicle shall not be used in any crime in future. The criminal revision application is disposed of in view of the aforesaid terms. [SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.] sjk