Seized vehicle disposal: superdari bond condition set aside where photographs and record were sufficient for evidence preservation.

Under the settled principles governing custody and disposal of seized property, a vehicle that is not required to be physically retained for evidence need not remain in police custody if photographs and a prepared record can preserve its evidentiary value. Applying those principles and the Supreme Court's directions on prompt disposal of case property, the Court held that insisting on a superdari bond from the prospective purchaser was unnecessary where the vehicle was already in the petitioner's custody, the trial was pending, and the accused raised no objection to sale. The condition was set aside and sale was permitted unconditionally after photographs were taken and furnished.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition imposed while permitting sale of the seized vehicle, requiring the prospective purchaser to execute a superdari bond, was justified and whether the vehicle could be sold unconditionally after preparation of photographs and related record.

Analysis: The Court applied the settled principles governing custody and disposal of seized property under Chapter XXXIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the directions of the Supreme Court on prompt disposal of vehicles and other case property. It noted that a vehicle which is not required to be physically retained for evidentiary purposes need not be kept in police custody merely to preserve the original article, because photographs and the prepared record can serve evidentiary purposes. The Court found that the vehicle was already in the petitioner's custody, the trial was pending, and the accused had no objection to sale. In these circumstances, insisting on a superdari bond from the purchaser was unnecessary and contrary to the governing legal position on use of secondary evidence and expeditious disposal of case property.

Conclusion: The condition requiring the purchaser to execute a superdari bond was set aside and the petitioner was permitted to sell the vehicle unconditionally after taking and furnishing photographs.

---