High Court Mandates Policy for Seized Vehicle Management in Mumbai

-

 

High Court Mandates Policy for Seized Vehicle Management in Mumbai

By Abhishek Jat, Advocate

In a significant judicial intervention addressing urban congestion issues, the Bombay High Court has directed authorities to formulate a comprehensive policy regarding the management of seized vehicles in Mumbai. The Division Bench comprising Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Advait M. Sethna has instructed the Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic Division) and the Inspector General of Police to develop a concrete mechanism for the proper handling of confiscated vehicles.

The case, Marathon Maxima Co-operative Housing Society v. Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai (Writ Petition No. 1545 of 2023), highlighted the growing problem of seized vehicles being indiscriminately parked or stored on public roads, pavements, and areas surrounding police stations. This practice has significantly impeded pedestrian movement and exacerbated Mumbai's already strained urban infrastructure.

The Court emphasized that Mumbai's severe space constraints necessitate prudent utilization of available public areas. The current practice of abandoning seized vehicles on roadways not only creates visual pollution but also poses safety and security concerns, particularly when these vehicles accumulate near police stations. The bench expressed concern that despite these issues, the Municipal Corporation had failed to address these encroachments, seemingly due to their association with law enforcement agencies.

During proceedings, the Court noted that despite a previous directive issued on April 13, 2023, authorities had yet to implement a policy framework for managing seized vehicles. This administrative inaction prompted the Court to mandate that a formal policy be developed under the guidance of the Principal Secretary, Home Department, with the finalized framework to be presented before the Court in subsequent hearings.

The judicial directive represents a significant step toward resolving the longstanding issue of improper storage of seized vehicles. By ordering authorities to ensure that confiscated vehicles are immediately transported to appropriate storage facilities rather than occupying public spaces, the Court has prioritized public convenience and urban functionality.

The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on April 29, 2025, when authorities are expected to present their proposed policy solutions to address this persistent urban management challenge.

Location: The Registrar General, Bombay High Court, Mantralaya, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400032, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Clarifies Recovery of Maintenance Arrears Under CrPC: A Landmark Judgment

-
Image
  Supreme Court Clarifies Recovery of Maintenance Arrears Under CrPC: A Landmark Judgment By Abhishek Jat, Advocate In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has reinforced the enforcement mechanisms for the recovery of unpaid maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The Court clarified that arrears of maintenance can be recovered by treating them as a levy of fine under Section 421 of the CrPC, ensuring that defaulters cannot evade their financial obligations. This ruling is a significant step toward strengthening the legal framework for the protection of dependents, particularly spouses and children, who rely on maintenance for their livelihood. Background of the Case The case involved an appellant wife, Poongodi, and her minor son, who filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC against the respondent husband, Thangavel, for maintenance. The trial court awarded maintenance of ₹300 per month, effective from February 4, 1993. ...
Read more

Supreme Court Clarifies "Readiness and Willingness" Requirement in Specific Performance Cases

-
Image
 Supreme Court Clarifies "Readiness and Willingness" Requirement in Specific Performance Cases Recent Judgment Sets Precedent on Acceptance of Earnest Money Refund By Abhishek Jat, Advocate In a significant ruling that reshapes the landscape of real estate contract enforcement, the Supreme Court of India has delivered a noteworthy judgment in Sangita Sinha v. Bhawana Bhardwaj and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 4972 of 2025). The Court has clarified crucial aspects regarding the "readiness and willingness" requirement for specific performance of contracts and established that acceptance of refunded earnest money may render a specific performance claim untenable. Case Background The dispute originated from an unregistered Agreement to Sell executed on January 25, 2008, for a property in Patna valued at ₹25 lakhs. The buyer (respondent) had paid ₹2.51 lakhs in cash and issued three post-dated cheques of ₹2.5 lakhs each. Shortly thereafter, the seller alleged that her si...
Read more

Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Husband Accused Under Sections 376, 377 & 304 IPC: A Legal Analysis Author: Abhishek Jat, Advocate

-
Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Husband Accused Under Sections 376, 377 & 304 IPC: A Legal Analysis Author: Abhishek Jat, Advocate     Introduction The Chhattisgarh High Court recently delivered a crucial judgment in Gorakhnath Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh (CRA No. 891 of 2019), reaffirming the judicial interpretation of marital rape and unnatural offenses under Indian criminal jurisprudence. The Court held that a husband cannot be prosecuted under Section 376 (rape) or Section 377 (unnatural offenses) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for engaging in sexual intercourse, including unnatural sex, with his major wife, even in the absence of her consent. The ruling underscores the long-standing exception in Indian criminal law regarding marital rape and highlights judicial scrutiny over charges framed under Section 304 IPC. Background of the Case The appellant, Gorakhnath Sharma, was convicted by the trial court for offenses under Sections 376, 377,...
Read more