' On 15-8-2002 Local Police of Police Station Saro Killay, Charsadda took into possession Toyota Hiace bearing No,E-7535- Peshawar. Petitioner applied for its return on Superdari in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Shabqadar but his application was rejected vide order dated 15-10- 2002. Thereafter, he made an application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Charsadda, but his application was dismissed vide order dated 28-10-2002., He has now moved this Court for return of the said vehicle on Superdari.
2. I have heard Mr. Attaullah Khan, Advocate the learned counsel representing the petitioner, Mr. Jamil Qamar, Advocate for the State and perused the record of the case carefully.
3. It is admitted position that vehicle No,E-7535-Peshawar was taken into custody by the local police of Police Station Saro Killay, District Charsadda, when the same was being driven by Ibadat Khan Driver of Naseer petitioner, who claims to have purchased the same from Shahzada, who in turn had purchased the same' from Abdul Muneeb. It is worth-mentioning that said Abdul Munib had purchased the said vehicle from Jehanzeb after he purchased the same in open auntie from Customs Department. It is also admitted position that no case has been registered against any person till date though the vehicle in question is in the custody of police since 15-8-2002. The said vehicle as mentioned above was taken into possession under sections 523/550, Cr.P.C. It is lamentable to note that no enquiry could be completed in 4 months time and there is no allegation that the said vehicle was either stolen or was used in any crime. The police authorities had sent the vehicle to the concerned Customs officials who has auctioned it and Assistant Collector Auction Cell, Peshawar vide his letter No,503, dated 7-10-2002 confirmed that it was the same vehicle which was auctioned by the Customs Department. After getting verification there was no justification with the police to detain it anymore, but they have detained the same unlawfully.
4. Petitioner is admittedly bona tide purchaser of the vehicle in question. There is no other rival claimant. The vehicle had been taken from the possession of his driver, therefore, being last possessor also he is entitled for interim custody of the seized vehicle. There are no compelling reasons to deny him custody, of the vehicle. I, therefore, allow this petition, and direct that vehicle in question be released/handed over to the petitioner provided he furnishes surety bonds to the tune of Rs,3,50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Shabqadar, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.