A court in Jammu has set aside a traffic magistrate's order that had declined to release a Jeep Wrangler – seized by the police over alleged modification – unless its tyres were removed.

Additional Sessions Judge Amit Sharma opined that the very purpose of providing the ad-interim custody of vehicle to its owner will stand defeated if the vehicle is given to him without tyres.

"In fact, by way of this condition what is appears that the Ld. Trial Court act as on Executive side rather than on judicial side. Because by removal of modified tyres, it clearly manifest that the offence under which the applicant has been booked has been proved without any trial," the Court added.

The Court was dealing with a revision plea filed by the vehicle owner Rahul Singh Bali against the order passed by Special Mobile Magistrate (Traffic), Jammu.

Bali's vehicle had been seized by the police under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, following issuance of a challan against him over alleged modification of the vehicle's tyres.

On August 1, the magistrate granted him ad-interim custody of the vehicle but directed that the modified tyres be removed and kept in police custody. Bali then moved for relaxation of the condition, arguing that it was arbitrary and unreasonable. However, the magistrate rejected the plea. Bali then moved the Sessions Court.

Considering the submissions, the Court at the outset observed that,

"Court of law can never be the mouth piece of the police".

The Court found that the condition for removal of tyres before the vehicle's release was not in consonance with law as the challan was still pending. The trial court can frame a conclusive opinion regarding the modification only on conclusion of the trial, it added.

“The Ld. Trial Court while providing the ad-interim custody of the vehicle imposed such condition which creates a stumbling block for the applicant that how he will be able to ply the vehicle on road without tyres,” the Court said.

The Court also noted that the traffic challan failed to specify what kind of vehicle was involved, whether it was a Thar or Jeep Wrangler.

"And without taking into account the nature of the vehicle straightway issued the challan against the applicant only and only reflects one thing that they are above law and if they booked the applicant u/s 207 of M.V. Act, it was also obligatory on the part of the Traffic officials to specifically highlighted the nature of the vehicle which has been seized in the matter," the Court added.

Consequently, the Court set aside the condition imposed by the magistrate and ordered release of the vehicle's tyres. It also directed the vehicle owner to obtain a valid registration certificate for the alleged modification.

The petitioner was represented by advocate Vansha Sharma.

Additional Public Prosecutor Arvind Rathore appeared for the Union Territory of J&K.