Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: 561-A, 550, 523

Tag Line  Illegal retention under Section 550 Cr.P.C. vitiates subsequent custody proceedings; Section 516-A Cr.P.C. applies only when inquiry/trial is pending.  Summary Police retained vehicle under Section 550 Cr.P.C. citing breach of peace. Did not produce vehicle before Magistrate as required by law. Parties sought custody under Section 516-A Cr.P.C. → conflicting orders by Magistrate and Sessions Court. High Court held: Retention under Section 550 was illegal (conditions not fulfilled) Police violated Section 523 Cr.P.C. (no production before Magistrate) Section 516-A Cr.P.C. not applicable (no inquiry/trial pending) Result: ✅ Proceedings quashed ✅ Vehicle to be produced before Magistrate for proper order ORDER; Through this petition filed under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the petitioner has assailed the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khanpur dated 22.11.2025 whereby the earlier order passed by the learned Magistrate dated 28.10.2025 directing the handing over of the vehicle bearing Registration No.RNS-18-470, was set-aside. The brief facts of the case are that on 22.08.2025, the police of Police Station Zahir Peer, District Rahim Yar Khan while conducting proceedings under section 550 Cr.P.C. retained the vehicle bearing Registration No.RNS-18-470 at the Police Station considering that there was a possibility of breach of peace with regard to the said vehicle and after registering Rapt No.14 dated 05.09.2025, with regard to retaining of vehicle at the Police Station, the police did not proceed further in the matter and did not produce the said vehicle before the learned Magistrate as was required under the law, however, both the petitioner as well as Shaukat Aziz (respondent No.5), submitted applications under section 516-A of the Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned seeking the temporary custody of the said vehicle and the learned Magistrate, vide order dated 28.10.2025, directed that the said vehicle be handed over to the petitioner namely Zeeshan Sajid, however, the respondent No.5 namely Shaukat Aziz successfully challenged the said order by way of filing of a…