Power to release property seized under section 56

Case laws and judicial interpretations regarding Section 57 and 64: (17) Sections 56, 64 - Procedure for confiscation against a vehicle - Confiscation not to be subject to satisfaction of any encumbrances - Claim of petitioner of hypothecation of the confiscated vehicle - Scope of - Case issue to be referred to Larger Bench : 99 (2005) CLT 38 : 2004 (II) OLR 627. (18) Sections 56, 64 - Confiscated vehicle - Release of sale proceeds in discharge of loan liability - When a proceeding for confiscation is undertaken, under Sec. 56 of the Act against a vehicle, at that stage, there is no debarring provision in that section or any other provision in that Act to make the order of confiscation subject to satisfaction of any encumbrances - Property confiscated under Sec. 56 shall vest in the State Government free from all encumbrances - Hypothecated vehicle remained as a charge for discharge of loan amount - If sale proceeds is to be released for repayment of loan, then that negatives the purpose of Section 56 inasmuch as the loanee-cum-the registered owner of the hypothecated vehicle gets the reward of repayment of his loan which otherwise would have been an additional burden on him - Order referring the issue to a Larger Bench : 2004 (II) OLR 627 : (2004) 29 (OCR) 875. (19) Vehicle confiscated under Sections 56 and 64 - sale proceeds released in discharge of loan liability - There is no debarring of provision in that section to make the order of confiscation subject to the satisfaction of any encumbrance when proceedings for confiscation of a vehicle is undertaken under Sec. 56 of the Act - property confiscated under the said section vests with the State Government free from all encumbrance whereas hypothecated vehicle remains as a charge for discharge of the loan amount - It is an admitted benefit to the owner of the vehicle - Order referred to a larger Bench for decision - 2004(II) OLR-627. (As amended in 1983) - Sec. 56 (before and after amendment) and sec. 57 - Distinction between prior and after amendment of Sec. 56 explained - After amendment two courses are open, one before Magistrate and another before the authorised officer - All these matters relate seizure and confiscation - Interim order as to custody for release can be made by the officer who made the order of confiscation - In the instant case the Conservator of Forests has no power to pass interim order of custody - The authorised officer can pass such order - Direction given : 2001 (I) OLR 613 : (2001) 21 OCR 111. If Section 57 would have continued to remain as such without any amendment, the general power of release of property could have been exercised by the concerned officer as indicated in Sec. 57. However, the insertion of that section of the expression and where a report of such seizure has been made to Magistrate under Sub-Sec. (2) of that section, makes it clear that such power of release can be exercised only where the seizure is reported to the Magistrate and the property is to be released with a direction to produce the same before the Magistrate as and when required by the Magistrate, where seizure is not reported to the Magistrate and the property is produced before the Authorised Officer, such a contingency would not arise. The question would arise as to whether the property seized by the authorised officer or produced before the authorised officer can at all be released before conclusion of a confiscation proceeding before the authorised officer. It is, of course, true that in view of the interpretation already given to Section 57, the question of interim release of the property by the authorised officer before whom confiscation proceeding is pending would not be governed by Sec. 57. However, that would not prevent the authorised officer to consider giving interim release of the property or the vehicle, since it is the authorised officer who can direct confiscation after conclusion of the proceeding it can be concluded that he has got ancillary or implied power to deal with the matter relating to custody of property during pendency of the proceeding. However, where the authorised officer is already in seisin of the property, any other statutory authority envisaged under Sec. 57 cannot direct release of the property or vehicle. (34) Sections 56 and 57 — Forest Officer seized the vehicle and proceedings under Sec. 56(2a) pending authorised officer rejected the petition under Sec. 57 for interim release of the vehicle - Remedy under Secs. 397, 401 and 482 of Cr.P.C., not maintainable - 1987(II) OLR - 33. Note (60) mentions that general provisions with regard to Sec. 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. are applicable and Sec. 57 of the O.F.A. is no bar for the interim custody application of seized timber.