If the case is rejected in an application, and how do you get those, what is the disposal of property and what does it matter? Section 451, primarily deals under the criminal procedure court, court of criminal procedure. And keeping in view the important aspect, we had requested Mr. Anandupi, a former district and session judge, principal district session judge from Karnataka to take his insights. All his webinars are doing extremely well on the Beyond Law CLC YouTube channel. If thought subscribed, you can subscribe to that. And we would also like if you can comment upon them, as to how did you find the speaker or what topic you want, we'll cherish that. Without taking much time, I would ask Mr. Anandupi to share his knowledge on this important aspect. Over to you, sir. Ah, namaste. Good afternoon, all. Thank you, Sri. Vikas, Serath, my esteemed viewers, jurist, advocate, law police torrents, and also the public in general. The topic is very vast. Topic is very interesting. The main thirst is, if the police seizes any property, from any person in any offense or criminal case, how the person being owner or agent of the owner, or even a financier, or a third party can lay claim from the court and ask the court to grant him interior portion of the seized property by the police or by various authorities. This is a very important question with which the trial courts everyday, infrequently deals with, especially those courts who work as magistrates or CGM or court officials, and even the high courts also on the revision side or appeal side also, here in dispose of the matters challenging order of the trial court or the court of revision regarding allowing or dismissing the IA file by the applicant for release of the property seized as an entity measure pending dispose of the case. When I got here, sections 45012, 459 of the CRPC, and the very important are 451, that is 451, 452, and 457 of CRPC. So there are chiefly two types of IS which the applicants may find. Firstly, seeking for interior release of the seized property where the IAO or the police have seized the property and produced the same before the court by submission of property form, the short form is P of property form, that is the first segment, section is 451 of CRPC. The second point is there is seizure of property by the police, but the said thing of seizure is not, I mean the thing seized is not produced before the court. So 451 leads with seizure of property, number two probably produced before the magistrate. In case of 457, property is seized, but the said property is not produced before the court. So court is not the custodian in the second case, the first case court is the custodian of the property. That is the important things with which we are concerned. My focus is to deal with the aspects of the case laws of the apex court or the principles which the courts must keep in mind before allowing or disavowing the claim made by the applicant or applicants or rival claimants seeking interim custody of the seized items or seized product. And we have got here various special criminal statutes under which also the respective IOs seize the thing say I got the forest act, where I got the Indian payers act, where I got the essential commodities act, where I got what do you call food safety standards act, where I got also arms act. So like that where I got so many specific enactments which empower the corresponding officer or authority in question to seize the thing under the relevant provisions of the special statutes under criminal law. Whether in those cases the court can apply the same yardstick as under section 415 of CRPC or not, or whether the provisions of the special statutes regarding custody of the property to be given, they prevail over the general principles of the CRPC under sections 451 of the CRPC. One more point is seizure of vehicles by the police and for long the set applications are not ordered by the consent courts. Or there is a case of rival claimants X says I'm the owner, Y says I'm the financier, Z says I'm a prospect to bear off the vehicle. So in case of rival disputes or rival claims, the vehicles brought within the precincts of the law courts or the precincts of the police stations. In that case, what are the guidelines of the Supreme Court of India? Seizure of narcotic drugs, seizure of contravents, whether the special courts in the Indie based act had the power under section 52, capital A of the Indie based act or not. Or whether the criminal courts or the special courts have no power at all to release a vehicle seized by the I Wander Indie based act. Can you apply the principles of section 451 of CRPC in case of release of a vehicle seized by the authority under the presence of Indie based act for its contravention? What about the aspect of seizure of a vehicle, seizure of a truck transporting sand without permit and the act is Mines and Minds Development and Regulation Act. There comes the aspect of Essential Commodities Act. There, the deputy commissioner or the district collector has got the power to release the seized vehicle. Whether the criminal courts can step in and pass order and direct the authority under the EC and the law that to deliver to the given person the custody of the seized truck as the order of a criminal court as blood of order of JNFCR not. All these niceties we'll discuss in the body of our brief study of one hour or one and a quarter hour and before that we'll take quickly section 451 of CRPC. That states that what court must do while considering the application filed by the applicant for custody of the seized item, seized property by the police pending further trial of the case that in crime stage the police or the Ivo or the authority seizes the given property and the applicant may go on the property, may move the court what court must do. So section 451 of the CRPC states that the property seized by the police or authority should have been produced before the magistrate or before the criminal court to clothe the criminal court with the power of passing order regarding interim custody of the seized vehicle or the seized product or seized property. So there should be production of the property before the criminal court in an inquiry or trial. What is called as inquiry? What is called as trial? We'll take it up at the next point. So the first point is there should be production of property by the authority or the police in case of commission of an offense. And section 457 of CRPC, there is no production of property by the police or authority, but here it is mandatory. There should be production of property by the Ivo before the criminal court in an inquiry or trial. And then after the court can pass order as an interim measure pending conclusion of the trial of the main matter or criminal case. And if the products or property seized are subject to speedy decay or natural decay. And if the court cannot wait for long to trace the owner or to consider the level claims of some applicants, the court may record evidence and dispose of the property which is subject to speedy and natural decay and credit to its account the amount of sale proceeds. Here the word property is defined as including any document also which the police seizes. So in a given case, the police seizes what is called as the passport of the particular offender under the partners act. They seize the passport. So a passport is called as a document and that passport being a document is called as property for section 451 of the CRPC. So property also includes a document which is produced before the criminal court by the concerned authority who seizes the same. So property of any kind or document which is produced before the court and if they are in the court's custody then the court has the power to grant or pass order stating as to whom it must be given as an interim measure. The second point is the court disperses of the main criminal case while passing order on the main criminal case of acquittal or conviction of the accused. The court must pass further order or section 452 of CRPC, 452 CRPC with regard to the property whether the interim order is made absolute or not. So the court must pass further order as to the position or otherwise of the seized property whether seized property is liable for destruction, liable for confiscation or whether court can pass order to deliver property to a guilty person. All these things the court must work out when the main case is concluded and at that time it must pass a final order regarding disposal of the property because the proceedings get concluded. The third point is destruction of libelous or other matters on connection of the accused for sections 272 to 275 of the IPC or sections 292 to 294 of the IPC. So if there is seizure of what is called as libelous and other matters by a publisher, the court may pass order for destruction of the libelous matter or materials or copies of the books as the case may be. In case of seizure of the drinks, food drinks or drugs or medicine preparations by a manufacturer of medicines and the offenses of sections 272 to 295 of the IPC, the court may pass order of destruction of the food, drink, drug or medicinal preparations. The next point is section 457 of the CRPC. So here the property is seized by the police and the seizure is reported by the police to the magistrate and in this case, the property is not produced before the court by the police. In 451 there is production of property. In 457 the property is not produced by the IO or by the police as the case may be before the criminal court during inquiry or trial. Then also the applicant too, the consentor, IA can move the court for release of the property even though the property seized by the police is not produced before the magistrate. And here the only point people release, the police must report the fact of seizure to the magistrate and if it is there, the matter ends, then even though the property seized is not produced by the police before the magistrate, the magistrate can pass order at whom the property should go as an interim measure. Then comes section 102 of the CRPC. Section 102 states that every police after seizure of any property should report forthwith the fact of seizure to the jurisdiction magistrate for information. So today at 10 o'clock the police releases a motor car. In a criminal case, car was used for transcoding what's called as timber of the government of India. So there must be seizure of the property and this fact of seizure must be reported by the consent officer seizing it on section 102 of the CRPC. The next point is what is called as inquiry? What is called as trial under section 451 of the CRPC? Section 451 of CRPC speaks of trial, speaks of inquiry and in this case, the police seizes the property because of complaint and in this case, the court is required to inquire or try the case. So here the word inquiry is defined in section two sublogue of CRPC. The word inquiry is defined in section two of the CRPC as meaning every inquiry other than a trial which a magistrate or a criminal court conducts with regard to a criminal case. So inquiry means every inquiry other than a trial. So filing of IA by the applicant for release of the property that's called as inquiry of the matter. And here the police have not filed charge sheet. One charge sheet is filed and the court frames charge and post matter for evidence of the prosecution. Then we say that the trial begins. So the word trial in section 2G is not defined in the CRPC. Trial means upon charge sheet by the police before the court against the accused. The court frame charge informs the accused that on these lines the case will go forward and we say upon frame of charge, the case is set to be for the stage of the trial. So 2G of the CRPC defines the word inquiry as meaning every inquiry other than a trial under CRPC. So sections 451 and 457 of CRPC deal with seizure of property by the police and in the first case, seizure is reported to the court and there is the thing being produced by the police before the magistrate. In the second case, the things seized is reported but the fact of its production is not there in the second case. But in both cases, the court has to inquire, the court has to try the case and then proceed forward. With this we take quickly the case law of the apex court on various aspects of development of sections 451 and 457 of the CRPC. We'll take a case of rival claims by Asi owner of a truck and the rival claim made by the financier of the truck. Financier, say a bank, State Bank of India advances loan to a loanee or a borrower to purchase a good truck. And suppose for example, this vehicle meets with an accident on us, the vehicle is told when in custody of the particular RC owner and the vehicle is traced to the police. And before the court, Asi owner moves the court to release the vehicle to him. The financier also goes to the same court and press application saying that due to me the vehicle is custody because there are dues of the borrower on the loan availed by the RC owner. So what about rates of the rival claimants in case of higher purchase agreement or in case of vehicle finance by a bank or a private financial institution to a borrower to buy a vehicle or a truck or a car as the case may be. Here the first case is Charanjit Singh Chhada versus Sudhir Mehta 2001 part seven Supreme Court cases 417, sections 24, 406, 420, 120 B 378 of the IPC and section 481 of the CRPC and also sections 8 and 20 of higher purchase act. In this case, the question involved was to whom the criminal court must give the interim custody of the seized vehicle which was stolen as per the complaint of the RC owner. In this case, the Supreme Court held in clear words that even though the RC owner finds his name in the certificate of registration but still the Supreme Court held that under section two suppose 30 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 it is the financier which is the owner of the seized vehicle because it has got its charge on the vehicle seized. In this case, the Supreme Court held that the RC owner as per the RC book cannot claim the vehicle custody in the trial or inquiry and in case of rival claims by the RC owner or the borrower of the concerned vehicle and also the financier or the company which financed the vehicle on higher purchase agreement HPA the Supreme Court held that the vehicle must be given to the financier and not to the RC owner because there are still dues of the amount to be paid by the principal borrower with regard to the loan transaction. So this is the first case of the Supreme Court on the aspects of price of RC owner and rights of the financier or financial institution or in case of higher purchase agreement what about the rights of the parties that is the case of Charanjit Singh Chhada versus Sudheel Mahita. The second case is Damodar Valley Corporation versus state of Bihar AIR 1961 Supreme Court page 440 in this case Damodar court held that in case of a higher purchase agreement it is in fact the one who gives the property to the higher for user. He is called as the I mean the higher purchaser and on fulfillment of terms of the HPA he becomes the full owner of the property. Damodar court held that third party rights are created as per law in case of higher purchase agreement even though the name of the higher purchaser is shown in the RC book as the RC owner and name of the financier is stated as the person who gave loan as per the higher purchase agreement. The rest case law is K. L. Johar and company versus CTO AIR 1965 Supreme Court page number 1082. Here also the first court held that in case of higher purchase agreement it consists of firstly element of bailment and secondly element of bail in the sense that there is a further sale of the vehicle or property once the particular borrower or a higher fulfills the terms of the contract. That is case of K. L. Johar and company versus Close your video somehow. Yeah, it's fine. No, again close. Yeah, no, it's fine. The third case is Sundarbai Ambalal Desai versus state of Gujarat. Very, very important case that is 2002 part 10 Supreme Court cases page 283. Sections 451 of CRPC and section 451 of CRPC. Disposal of Muddamal articles kept in police custody pending trial in this case. The facts involved were that seized gold ornaments kept by the police in the police station, seized by the police in the criminal case. They were replaced by the police machinery by keeping inside scurious ornaments, duplicate ornaments. So in this case, gold ornaments seized in a criminal case by the police were not produced before the criminal court. Number two, they were replaced by the police only by keeping inside the seized what do you call box spurious things or duplicate ornaments. So in this case, the apex court late on various guidelines which the trial courts must follow in case of seizure of what's called as precious stones, gold, silver, currency notes, vehicles or liquor, narcotic drugs, et cetera. The apex court late on various guidelines and at time number seven, it late on four important guidelines to be followed by the trial courts, to be followed by the police. The first point is the principles on which this case law is developed is owner of article should not suffer because of its remaining with the police or the court for long. With the police, they live for one year or the court they live for one year. The first point is owner of article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation. In the court's hand also, the property may just be stolen before the police also the thing may get disappeared. The second point is court or the police would not be required to keep the articles in safe custody for long time. Say for one week I can keep it for two weeks I can keep it but not for long. The third point is if proper Panchanama before handing out portion of the seized article is prepared that Panchanama will serve as a document of seizure stating it description, its valuation and all those things. So in this case, keep with you photocopy of the seized articles or keep with you with a group of seized articles prepare Panchanama and hand over property to the concerned owner of the case may be and if necessary evidence can be recorded by the court describing its nature in detail. The fourth point is this jurisdiction of the record in the form of evidence should be exercised promptly and there should not be long delay on the part of the particular person. So here the important point is namely these are the four important parameters which the Supreme Court observed at Parampar 7 of the judgment. At Parampar 12 of the judgment the Supreme Court also laid an important guidelines prepare detailed property Panchanama of the article seized may be gold or silver or currency notes or even what you call intoxicants or liquor in the case may be take photographs of its articles and take a bond from the person in question to the effect that he will produce the same before the court during trial. The third point is take proper security from the person go back to RC owner, the vehicle go back to the owner of jewels, the gold ornaments take from her or him a bond, an empty bond with security as the case may be and those things the Supreme Court laid down in the above particular case. At Parampar 14 of the judgment the Supreme Court also stated that in case the properties are not given to the complainant or to the person from whom it is seized or to the rebel claimant before the court then the Supreme Court part order saying that the same the property can be sold and the amount will be recovered and kept in the bank or if the properties cannot be sold or if they are to be retained keep them in bank lockers don't keep them in the lockers of the consent police station lock or after consent court it is called as safe after court so they passed order retain them in bank locker by the police or by the magistrate they can keep it for one week if it is beyond one week then they say keep it in bank locker and for courts the system is court seizes the property gold ornaments or currency also it won't retain it with it for more than even 24 hours on the same day by after phone the property seized being very valuable they are lodged by the court in the office of the treasury office of the county state government so treasury offices are there at Tollacurly district level and they lodge it in the treasury office in the safe custody of the treasury that is the aspect of the practice of the trial course to whom the police produces valuables gold ornaments or silver ornaments or studied articles or ornaments your currency also as the case may be one more point is in case of seizure of vehicles tapas court held give back to the RC owner in case of no other rival claims forthwith take bond put conditions don't keep the vehicle in the police station or in the court if the rival claims to decide as to whom it can be given and then go forward and if no claimants are there to take the vehicle then issue order of proclamation which is noticed to RC owner noticed to insurance company noticed to other person as the case may be financed here if nobody appears issue the proclamation fix rate for sale sell it and put the amount in the account of the court in case of other items also tapas court laid down various guidelines so I will not take much time on the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai versus state of Gujarat in case of part 10 SCC 283 this is the bible for the trial courts in my opinion this case law is of the year 2002 it is now a 2 decade old case law but still based on ratio of this case the trial courts pass order releasing property in favor of persons who are to be given portion of the property the next case is poli seizes gold ornaments and polis reports the matter to the consent court and court passes order retain gold ornaments with you until filing of charge it because in case of theft of gold ornaments poli says we want it we want to keep it with us because if the owner makes claim we have to show to him the gold ornaments for purpose of identification and in this case the polis may say that they require the particular thing with them gold ornaments in this case huge cash and large number of ornaments gold ornaments silver ornaments worth more than rupees 10,000 were seized by the polis in 1958 so it is a case of nearly I mean 60 years I mean 6 decades old so in 1958 in the night of November 28 of 1958 there was theft of huge cash gold ornaments etc from house of the complainant and see her name is Shreemati Basava wife of Damanagoda Patil it is a case of the polisation of Harveery that is a district place in Antarctica that is orbiting the national highway number 4 and there was seizure of and there was theft of these huge amount of cash and large number of ornaments so she lost complaint before the polis and polis seized the same from the thief and the thief was Bukkura upon seizure the court directed the polis to return with them until they file charge it so these things they remain with the polis or the polisation because the polis was required to show these seized ornaments to the complainant for purpose of identification and it so happened that fire accused were traced and from them they seized cash and gold ornaments etc and the polis had reported to the concerned magistrate the fact of seizure of gold ornaments from the hands of the fire accused and CJM of Harveery the polis to retain the seized articles with it and to get the value of gold ornaments determined by a goldsmith and for that that requires time to examine the gold piece by piece they have to weigh it they will see its purity so that takes even a week or two weeks when the articles were in the control of Harveery polisation and they were in the guard room of the polisation and they were in a trunk and at some time the PSI was transferred and the new PSI came the new PSI while taking charge wanted to take custody of these gold ornaments which was in the trunk and to a surprise there were no gold ornaments there were no cash which the polisized seized from the particular fire accused in the criminal case then the PSI put in charge reported to the higher ups saying that I took charge today and I could not take possession of the seized gold ornaments and reported the lapse on the part of the previous PSI because gold ornaments cash kept in the sealed trunk in the guard room of polisation it did not contain those items they contained some other papers in fact they contained some stones as per the case law which the facts is being stated there were those called as finding of stones in the particular trunk and this particular woman the complainant applied to the magistrate at Haveri for release of the seized item seized gold ornaments and polis filed of the actions saying that this article with them and the magistrate held that the articles were not produced by the police before the court but that there filed only the report and court had permitted the police to keep the things with it for purpose of investigation and since the articles never reached the custody of the court the magistrate held that it has no power to pass order for granting custody of the seized gold ornaments and cash by the police from those five accused persons so the owner of gold ornaments suffered a negative order then she applied in revision 2 the court officials the petition also dismissed by the complainant then after the matter went to the high court high court also passed order saying that these ornaments those seized by the police and though the court had directed the gold ornaments to be with the control of the police and since they are not in the control of the court after 2 courts below are proper so the complainant approached Supreme Court of India I have lost my gold ornaments I have lost my currency notes and police had seen the same and in the police custody when they were there there was replacement of ornaments and cash by stones so the upper court held that the magistrate committed illegality in dismissing the year filed by the owner of the gold ornaments the upper court held that the fact that the seizure of the articles gold ornaments was reported by the police to the magistrate and the magistrate passed an order stating that you retain these ornaments until you file charges and until you get completed the work of getting the evolution of the properties the upper court held that custody of the property does not mean physical custody or portion of the property if the court is given the application by the police or the concerned IO to the fact that we have seized a given thing and if the court passes an order retain these seized properties with you until filing of charges the upper court held that custody does not mean physical delivery or portion of the ornaments or things or articles or property by the police to the court in this case the upper court held that the magistrate court the court officials and the high court committed illegality it held that the magistrate should have passed order along with the application even though the property was not there you got to pass order determine its value and ask the police machinery to pay to the complainant the value of the lost ornaments so in this case the upper court came down very heavily on the trial court the court of revision the high court and there are 7 of the order the court observed that value of property stolen was rupees 10,000 it directed the state government to pay to the complainant for which 10,000 this is the value say 64 years ago so now it must be a fortune amount then also a fortune amount so the vice court held that the state government shall pay to the complainant rupees 10,000 being value of the property which was lost by the police in its guard room at police station and you have time of 3 months to the concerned police to pay the amount of rupees 10,000 to the complainant so this case law states in clear words that in case of loss of the properties at the hands of the court or at the hands of the police and if the factum of see there is reported by the police to the magistrate the magistrate has got the power to pass order if there are lost means the court has to direct the police or the wrongdoer to pay to the person who is the owner its value or cost of the property so misappropriated or so lost as the case may be that is the case of Srimati Basava wife of Damangoda party versus state of Mysore 1977 part 4 SCC page number 358 so with this I have discussed the aspect of rights of the financier versus rights of of the owner of an item owner of property which is seized being lost when in police custody or when in custody of the court he can get what is called as the value of the property which is lost the next case law is state of MP versus Rameshwar Rathod 1990 part 4 SCC page number 1849 sections 6 capital A surplus 1 and 7 of the essential commodities act and sections 451 and 457 of the CRPC so under the EC Act the deputy commissioner or the collector of the strict has got the power to release the property sealed by his authorities or his inferiors so the collector of the district has got the power to release the sealed truck say transporting wheat without permit or transporting wheat of a fair priced shop so wheat or rice etc which was meant for sale through fair price shops now we know these black marketies they just buy from the fair price shop owner fair price shop owner will not sell them to the ration cart holders and this particular container was seized containing wheat in a given case so season of truck was there by the officer under the essential commodities act and there the officer is the applicant too the applicant can move the court move the deputy commissioner or collector for release of the seized vehicle or seized thing as the case may be so whether that particular power given to the collector under the EC Act can the magistrate exerciser or section 457 of CRPC not is the question involved so in the case of state of MP versus Rameshwar Rathur the apex court held that even though the essential commodities act state that any person whose vehicle is seized by the authority under EC Act has to move the collector for release of the seized vehicle so seized by the officer under the EC Act but still the power of the criminal court is not completely ousted on section 457 of CRPC so the apex court at paragraph 6 of the edition observed that normally on a CRPC criminal courts of the country have the jurisdiction and ouster of the ordinary criminal court in respect of a crime can only be inferred if that is the conclusion following the verdict of the act EC Act did not say or does not say anywhere that criminal courts of the country cannot grant release of property it states no one can move the DC or collector for release of the vehicle but since the EC Act does not contain what is called as a specific covenant that criminal courts have enough power to deal with the matter the apex court held that criminal courts of the country have the jurisdiction and ouster of the jurisdiction must be specifically stated in the body of the special statute so the apex court held that order of the magistrate has got the power to order for release of the seized vehicle under provisions of section 6 and 6 capital A of the EC Act so with this you took the case law the apex court on the essential commodities act the point is wild life protection act 1972 seizure under wild life production act whether the criminal courts have got the power or whether only the forest assaults under the wild life production act have got the power the case law is state of state of UP versus Lallu Singh L L L L Lallu Singh that is 2007 part 3 crimes supreme court page 224 so in this case the apex court in the case of Lallu Singh observed that attractions 50 suppose one of the wild life production act in this case the officials empowered under the wild life act have got the power to release the property seized and in case it states that the officer under the wild life production act should form proper opinion as to whether the property seized becomes property of the state government or not if you hold that the property becomes property of the state government and that that property was used by the accused to commit the offence then the magistrate has no power to release the thing seized by the authority under the wild life production act that was court held that the magistrate has to see if the official had formed belief on reasonable grounds that the person committed the offences under the wild life act so if the officer of the wild life act forms opinion that the seized property become property of the state government then magistrate has no power if it does not form opinion that the property seized is not property of the state government then magistrate can step in and can pass order that depends upon nature of formation of the opinion by the authority under sections 39 and 15 of wild life production act of 1982 so with this the next point is namely the case law of the up next court inter continental agencies forever imitate versus Amin, Chand, Khanna and others sections 451 of CRPC is involved here here the facts involved in the above case is namely there was loss of the property seized by the police and in this case the up next court held that if there is loss of property seized by the police either in the custody of the police station or before the court as per decision of Supreme Court of India Basava versus Shetha Mysore has told me previously the concerned applicant must receive the value of the property so lost or so misappropriated so the case of inter continental agencies is again a case involving the same ratio of Basava, Khom, Damanagoda, Patil versus state of Mysore so in this case there was seizure of bus upon seizure of bus the bus was stolen the bus was not recovered at all by the police thereafter so the officer of the vehicle moved the court given the bus and the police informed the vehicle is not traceable vehicle is stolen as we know the concerned persons they just separate all the parts and even they sell separately the doors the windows even the seat as the case may be and even they may just convert the entire body of the concerned vehicle as a complete sheet so there is total loss of the particular vehicle vehicle was not traced at all the upper court held that owner of vehicle must get the value of the vehicle which was with the police in their custody and from which there was theft of the seized bus by the thief and the vehicle not being traced by the concerned police in spite of taking sufficient steps so with that the next important case law on the above point is the case of Ashok Kumar versus state of Bihar that is 2001 part 9 Supreme Court cases page number 718 718 in this case the seized by the police was rotting in the compound of the court complex for number of years vehicle was seized by the police and the police upon seizure produced the vehicle before the concerned court and this vehicle was rotting in the compound of the court for number of years the owner might not have just approached the court for custody or the banker may have just also kept quite or if there is no bank finance then in case of seizure offenses nobody will come to claim the property if the claim means then they admit that they are the culprits so there was no claim of the seized vehicle which was lost in compound of the court for a long number of years the best court directed the trial courts in the country as the para 2 of the above order saying that court must not keep with it a vehicle in its court compound for a long time till disposal of the main case main criminal case and it must to the RC owner with conditions if he is not there means take steps it is a proclamation and you can take the further steps that is the case law of Ashok Kumar v. state of Bihar so with that the next important case of the apex court is namely state of Karnataka v. K Krishnan that is 2000 part 7 Supreme Court cases page number 80 section 71 capital A of the Karnataka forest act so various special statutes have got separate sets of procedure regarding release of the seized article so in this case the apex court had para 7 observed that if any vehicle is seized on the allegation by the I.O that it was used for committing a forest offense the apex court held the same shall not be released in favor of the RC owner also until the main case is over so no question of release of the vehicle seized by the office under the forest act if it was used for commission of a forest offense the apex court held that wait for disposal of the main matter until then don't release the property the vehicle because under the forest act the power is there for the court to confiscate the vehicle to the state court so at para 7 the apex court order that when any vehicle is used is seized by the by the authority for committing a forest offense under the forest act the same shall not be normally be returned to a party until all the proceedings are over including proceedings of confiscation it held that in fit cases a court is inclined to release the vehicle to a person in custody it must take bank guarantee don't take simply bond take for the vehicle's value bank guarantee with sureties for the likes of so you want to release release with a rider take from the RC owner bank guarantee but not a simple bond that is the ratio of state of Karnataka versus Christian 2000 part 7 supreme court cases page number 80 so I have discussed case law of the special acts forest act case law of wildlife protection act case law of essential commodities act case law of heritage act see we have got there separate sets of rules and there in some cases as we have discussed CRBC has no application the next question is if the property seized by the police in a criminal case is not produced before the magistrate can the magistrate has got the power to release such property which is seized by the concerned police but not produced before the court here comes section fourth discern of the CRBC the case law is Ram Prakash Sharma versus state of Haryana 1978 part 2 supreme court cases page number 491 so in this case police recovered huge sum of money from the appellant and the same was seized and in this case the said seizure was reported by the police to the court but the cash amount seized was not produced before the criminal court so the criminal court held the supreme court held the magistrate has got the power to order for release of the seized property in this case the currency notes seized by the police were missing the court held that the owner of the said currency notes or the component must be given the amount of money which was circulated because of act of the police so even though the property seized was with the police only and the property seized was not delivered by the police before the magistrate but still the magistrate has got the power to release the property and if they are lost at the hands of the police the court can direct the police to reimburse the amount so lost or misappropriated by the concerned police so this the next important case law of the applies court is namely Sajan K. Varghese versus state of Kerala 1989 part 2 Supreme Court cases page number 208 in this case there was seizure of semi-finished films of a film which was being shot up to 90% so the police seized was called as the video of a film which was shot to the extent of 90% and this particular video containing shooting of 90% of a Malayale film or seized by the police in a criminal case lodged like an actor Sajan K. Varghese who is producer of a film Kerala so this Varghese had borrowed huge sums of money from various investors by saying that I will invest your funds in producing a film I will give you very heavy returns and many depositors they deposited their hard-earned money in deposits with this Sajan K. Varghese and at the end of the day the Sajan K. Varghese did not return to the depositors and they filed complaints and Varghese was arrested by the police and the police seized what is called as semi-finished film role of a Malayale film and in this case the apex court held that semi-finished film role is not a property intersection of the CRPC because until the entire film is shot in full and the film is ready for the public in the theater the apex court held that the seizure of a film in a case of complaint against Sajan K. Varghese by the investors of their monies police could not have seized the particular semi-finished film role in this case it directed the trial court to release to the particular person what is called as semi-finished film role in this case so I have discussed as to how the scope of the world property was used by the court in case of Sajan K. Varghese versus state of Kerala it is a very important case touching some niceties of law so with this the next point is Ramesh Chand Jain versus the state of Haryana that is 2007 part 15 Supreme Court cases page number 26 in this case whether a criminal court can decide rates of rival claimants involving a civil dispute or not whether criminal court has got a power in a criminal forum wherein two persons have laid claim on the property seized say a vehicle is seized say I say I am the RC owner X says he is the RC owner M says I am the buyer of the vehicle from the seller so whether criminal court has got a power to decide on interstate disputes between rival claimants that is RC owner of truck the bank has financed guarantor and borrower disputes are even in case of a buyer of a vehicle buying the vehicle from the seller even though loan amount is due on the set vehicle so in this case the press court held that rights of rival claimants which is purely civil in nature the criminal court cannot embark on a trail so the criminal court cannot decide interstate civil liberties of the parties may be RC owner the banker, the financier the guarantor as the case may be and bank must pass order only giving the inter-crashity of the seized vehicle as an interior measure court has no power in the criminal forum for reason of property what is called as interstate civil liberties between RC owner, the principal power the banker, the financier and the guarantor so with that the next case law is state of MP versus Madhukar Rao there is 2008 part 14 SSCC made number 6 24 in the case of wildlife protection act so season of vehicle by the first authority for commission of offence on the forest act sections are 15, sub laws 1, sub laws c that with the of the forest I mean the wildlife protection act the press court held that the magistrate to order for release of the seized vehicle section 15, sub laws 1, sub laws c of wildlife protection act so these case laws they just tell us how special criminal statutes they have got special law and how the particular regular criminal courts have no power to release the seized property the next case is state NCT Delhi versus Narendra 2014 part 13 SSCC made number 100 in the case of deli excise act in this case a vehicle transporting liquor bottles was seized as per deli excise act the authority to release the vehicle is the officer under the excise act but not the criminal courts so the press court held that because being a special statute the deli excise act stating that the arts owner can move authority under the excise act but not the court the press court held that JFC deli has no power to release the seized truck which was seized by the authority for illegally transporting liquor bottles so with that I have completed the aspects of case law of the press court important aspects of the law and I have got also some more case law on the point but still because of lack of time I cannot proceed further I will take only last two case laws Nevada properties private limited state of Maharashtra 2019 20 Supreme Court cases page number 119 119 so in this case power of seizure under sections 102 and 47 does not extend to immobile properties so property used in sections 451 and 47 means only properties which are immobile including documents but not properties which are immobile so a person being owner of property which is immobile cannot move the criminal court due to him the custody of the portion of the property immobile even as an interior measure so the apex court observed that the word produced in sections 457 and 102 of the CRPC means actual or physical production which would apply to property immobile and immobile property cannot be produced in a court that is the case law of the apex court in the case of Nevada properties versus state of Maharashtra 2019 part 20 Supreme Court cases page number 119 so last case law is case law of NDPS act section 52 capital A of NDPS act so the authority under NDPS act or the poise under the general statutes she is a vehicle a car transcoding non-coding drug so she is an effect car whether police, local police or authority under the NDPS act and the vehicle was used to transport for is called as non-coding drug whether the criminal courts have got the power to release the said property or not is the question with which we are concerned the question is whether the criminal courts have got the power to release the said property used by the accused for commission of section 52 capital A of NDPS act or not here the case law of the appeal court is there on the ever point there is a 2016 part 3 supreme court cases page 379 union mohan lull and another so the case of mohan lull that is the 2016 part 3 scc 379 state that regular criminal courts machete court special court under NDPS act they are no power to order for the release of vehicle seized by local police seized by the office under NDPS act which was used by the accused to transport NDPS act section 52 capital A of NDPS act criminal court has no power at all to release a car or vehicle or container used to transport NDPS act and the question is which court should move for release of vehicle seized car is seized criminal court has no power then which court can grant the vehicle custody it is drugs disposal committee they want to authority court as drugs disposal committee before that committee the RC owner should move application this vehicle under 52 A of NDPS act for release of the seized vehicle in the case of in the case 5 years old that is 2016 part 3 court cases page number 379 para number 31 31.1 very important disposal of property even interim also only by drugs disposal committee but not by magistrate or by the special court for NDPS offenses so with this I completed the brief study on the aspect of case law of the apex court under CRPC under special criminal statutes as to how in some cases CRPC section 451 has no application so courts cannot pass order in a casual way but they deal with aspect of special statutes so see the special statutes see the gift on the point and then go covered the advocates also should know sharply in which case their application will be allowed and with regard to the other aspects and if the court does not know properly what the lawyers advocate should empower the court as you all know nobody is perfect nobody can claim that even the apex court appoints amicus curie for what purpose because it wants from an expert in a given field because on the aspect the court may not have all the important inputs so with this I conclude my talk on the aspect of CRPC property CRPC documents CRPC vehicles I mean articles, drugs as the case may be you are investigating liquors and with regard to rates of financiers rates of RC owner rates of third party loss of the item seized when in the police station or in the court duty of the court to direct the police to return to the applicant it's a value at the case may be right now we don't have any question as such but on youtube yes we have sir could you explain the difference between section 451 and 457 and whether these are orders or interlock free and if so whether these order are advisable or not hello hello it says what is the difference between section 451 and 457 and whether these orders are interlock free if so whether they are advisable now order passed by the court on PA is called as an interlocutary order and on the interlocutary order revision lies to the court of section 450 I mean under section 397 of the CRPC so that is a order the court of sections the order being passed by what's called as the trial court, GMC court order passed by the special court of the rank of a court of sections then the matter is in revision to the high court so the depends upon the forum so 451 is a case of passing a order by the court which is what is called as interlocutary order and under section 459 of the CRPC power to sell perishable property if the person entitled to is not known or is absent and the property is subject to speedy and natural decay or if sale is for one fact of the owner so when the court can sell property if there are perishables and the owner is not known there is section 459 but the answer is order of the court on IA for release of the property is an order which can be revised before the court of revision it may be a court of issuance or it may be the high court as the case may be in a possible case for the release of vehicle the court sends notice to the complainant is it mandatory is it mandatory sending a notice to the complainant there is no need for the court to inform the complainant that they are hearing a matter say in a criminal case the property is seen by the police the property is seen is say namely a vehicle the complainant is injured the vehicle is seized by the police the arse owner removes the court for release of the vehicle so only the state and the arse owner the parties with which the court must hear the victim or the complainant is taken care of by the court by the state only so the victim has no right to be heard under CRPC for release of the seized article or seized item because in case of complaint of the victim the state commissioner enters and the victim his rights are protected by the state only he is saying how would it be divisible in view of the bar under section 397 that no revision lies in an interlockary order but see in some cases the point is that some courts are held that order passed by the magistrate is not an order which is revisible but still at the end of the day the court is required to pass order as to whether the IHT is to be allowed or not at the end of the day the matter may go to the IHT as to whether the right of a party seized will culminate into right at the main end of the case is not a main issue but where got case law of the apex court also case law of high courts also which states that order passed by the magistrate court other being or disillusioned by any person for intermission of the vehicle as a case may be another which is liable for revision before the court officials and we got here the case law of our court also on the very same point that is a case of the High Court of Canada in case of Caesar of marketing drugs under the presence of NDPS fact and this in fact an underport addition of the High Court of Canada in this case the case is Jubaita wife of late Mohammed Ali versus narcotic control Brio NCB Bangalore criminal petition number 3792 of 2020 data order is 2411 2020 in this case vehicle seized by the officer of NDPS at Bangalore that vehicle contained narcotic drugs so the RC owner of the vehicle, RC owner is from Canada he moved the whistle court after rank of citizen judge at Bangalore city court all number 33 for release of swift car seized by the author tender NDPS act the said court whistle court of NDPS act dismissed the IA file by RC owner on the ground that it has no power then the RC owner moved the court in criminal revision and petition but not criminal appeal because the case title is criminal petition number 4792 of 2020 and even the High Court passed order stating that revision petition is maintainable it held that the Supreme Court of India which it told previously of the year 2016 it held that magistrate or special court has no power to order for release of the seized vehicle and it directed the RC owner to move the next disposed committee under NDPS act at Bangalore for release of the seized vehicle in this case our court based landsaw decision of Mohanlal case of that is 2016 part 3 SCC page number 379 so order passed by court on IA under SCC is revisable now this is a protocol a mind boggling exercise looks very simple but when we lay hands before the court involving special statutes then comes the main difficulty other cases accident cases, seizure of bus seizure of car very simple but these special statutes are prescribed special procedure to even give the property back to the owner even as an in theory measure under section 143 A of the negotiable instrument act organ section 451 of CRPC being moved to execute the interim compensation now 143 capital A of the NI act is introduced in 2018 there the offences under section 138 of the N act check was issued, check bonds and the complainant complies the procedure of giving notice then no amount is paid then if filed before the criminal court what is called as a parent complaint on section 200 of CRPC so here interim compensation the court can pass if the complaints are lost from and after I think the date is 1 9 2018 if I am correct so if it there means as an interim measure the court can direct the accused to pay to the complainant the person whose check was bounced because of the respond accused not keeping in his account balance and this particular complainant issued a bond before the criminal court saying that in case my case at the fact end is held as not maintainable or if the accused is acquitted of the charge of section 138 of N act the court will direct this complainant to return to the accused the amount which the accused had paid to the complainant as an interim compensation under 143 capital A of N act so this 143K cannot be tagged with section 451 of the CRPC and if the particular complainant does not pay to the accused the amount which was paid to him as interim compensation then under N act only cannot be recovered as area of land review the procedure under N act 143A I will also it can grant interim compensation they have fixed up the scale they got their case law of the apex court on the above point also but we cannot link 143A of N act with section 451 of the CRPC and in fact N act is what is called as a semi civil nature trial even though it is called as a crime under N act but its scope is as if there is trial of a civil case and there the purpose of N act is to restore to the complainant the amount of check which was dishonoured that is the main purpose of penalised the accused person even though he is called in law as an accused still he is of the rank of an opponent or different in a regular civil case we have taken the questions now right now I thought its over what is the procedure of releasing the seized vehicle under the section 38 of the Delhi excise act I don't know whether you will be able to say that there Delhi excise act was invoked by the authority under the excise act a truck was transporting illegally this liquor liquor was transported without permit or it may be liquor which was stolen without any permit or without any advices in this case as per Delhi excise act they have got the authority who has got the power to release the seized vehicle for hundreds of poisons of the Delhi excise act the happens court held that when special statute states the officer who has to be moved for release of the seized vehicle then that remedy only must be exhausted without any power it held that JFC Delhi has no power to release the seized truck which was seized by the authority under the Delhi excise act it be a special criminal statute in case of special criminal statutes those provisions prevailed over poisons of the CRPC section 45 CRPC thank you sir for sharing your insights and we just thought that you would be taking us to the gamut of 451 and 201 particular act but you have taken us to the white spectrum of the knowledge we are indebted for that and tomorrow we will be having a session on impleading a baitment setting aside of a baitment and condonation of Delhi that is we will be discussing order 22 of the court of civil procedure court so do join us justice KT Sankaran a former judge Kerala Hykot and the former chairman of the Kerala judicial academy would connect with us at 430 but do stay connected with us tomorrow and thank you sir once again


OSAP projects are a very flexible tool that can be used essentially throughout the entire research life cycle that we talked about.  Whether you're analyzing your data or you are planning out a hypothesis, OSAP projects are a really great way of kind of getting that started. I would describe OSAP projects as a really, really great way of creating project management around specific levels of a research initiative.  At top level, you could have your research lab, but then you have a folder for a research initiative, research initiative to a grant project, something like that. And then inside of that, you have additional folders. This just gives you an opportunity to create a project management idea for each one of these folders where you can share and coordinate with colleagues, whether you're creating a hypothesis all the way through, you know, establishing your protocol. Now, on the OSAP, that kind of looks a little bit interesting where we have kind of this parent child structure of projects. It's almost like one of those nesting dolls type of ideas, where at the top level, you have a OSAP project where this is the example of your, you know, your project level in major one, but then you have sub-projects where on the OSAP, those are called components. So here you'll see, you know, main title for the main one, but then I've created components for each one of these sub-projects. And that kind of works in that same structure. In each one of these components, you will see a section for hypothesis, data collection protocols. Those components really help you organize your structure and it also helps you kind of work around some storage restrictions as well. I'm actually going to go back and I'm going to show you a little bit of how that works on the OSAP. So if I'm going to create an OSAP project, the first thing we do is go to osf.io. I'm going to click on the create new project or we get going. I want to talk about our dashboard really quick. This is a great way for you to quickly look through all of your projects. So I have a ton of projects on the OSAP. And if I'm going to look for any of my resources or things, all I need to do is go to osf.io, look at our dashboard, write down, search for what I want based on contributors or the title and it'll pop it up very quickly. So it's a very great way of kind of expediting your work. Anyways, to create a project, you want to start with creating a new OSAP project. This is the green button that's here. Click this. This gives me the opportunity to pop up window to show what title I would like. So I'm just going to put test project. Again, these affiliations are associated with OSAP institutions. I'm going to remove those. Storage locations. This is very important, especially if you are in different regions of the world. We offer four different storage locations. Now, don't look for your particular country. Think about regions and what you're working on. The point of this is to really get around storage restrictions based on region of the world. So like say the EU, they do have how restrictions and how data can be used and stored. One of the important ones that you can do is you could store your work in Germany and that will really help you get around some of those storage restrictions. In our case, I'm just going to say this is stored in the United States and click create. The option of working here or going to the project, I'm going to go to project. Awesome. So now this is my test project. All test projects, when they come in, they are immediately private. I have the option of making this public or private at any time. And again, I can delete this at any time. That's why I'm doing a little bit more of a demo here, but it provides a lot more flexibility than registrations or registrations. They can only be withdrawn and your metadata still remains, whereas project can be completely deleted and no one will ever know exists. Title up top. All you need to do to change it is click the title and make the edits and click the green button for contributors. So contributors on the OSF is a great way of kind of collecting all of the people who are associated with your project into one place so that you can all work on something at the same time. To add a contributor, all I'm going to do is go to the top here.  Now in this case, I'm going to search for my colleague, Eric Olson, who might not even be here, but that is okay. I'm going to click and add him as a contributor. Now, I have a couple of different options here. I can add him as a read and write contributor, which basically means he has the right to read and write on this project, but he doesn't really have the right to create. It kind of restricts some of the different things. I don't really have enough time to get into it, so maybe one of our product people can help and send out some of the differences in the permission levels and that's something you need to evaluate as well. But I'm going to add him in this case as an administrator. Say you are in a situation where you are a lab manager, where you're on a ton of different projects, but you're not necessarily on the byline of those projects. You are not on the citation. You can actually remove that person from the byline, but they could still participate on the project by clicking this button of bibliographic contributor. I'm going to remove Eric from this and I'm going to click add. Now, this will add him to the project. He is not a bibliographic contributor, so if I go back to the main project here, you will not see him on this contributor line. You will not see him on the citations here, whereas if I go back and click on contributors again, I add him as a bibliographic contributor, save the changes, click save, go back to my main page. Suddenly, Eric is now as a contributor on the byline and he's in the citations, which is fantastic. Another element I want to talk about is file uploads. The OSF is a storage provider, obviously, but one of the ways that you can upload files is really to use a few different methods, but I tend to prefer the drag and drop method. So on my desktop right now, I have a folder. I'm going to take this folder and I can drag it and put it directly onto the OSF storage folder, or I can go to the files page, which is located up here at the top, take that document and bring it all the way over here and also drag it and drop it in. I'm going to go back to the main page. I'm going to drag and drop this in, which is awesome. Now, all files on the OSF have the ability to be versioned. So now, if I am, say, on my document as that uploads, I can make a change, as you guys are looking at my thing, I can make a change this to this document and I'm going to click out, make sure that that's saved. Yep. And I can upload it using the same title to this OSF project. Great news is that now created only one version of that file that will pop up here, and you will see that version render here as the latest version. But I go over here to top right hand corner and look at versions, revisions, and I can see the original. Come on. And then the new version. This is excellent for, especially for those who love to send emails back and forth saying, hey, here's the latest version of this manuscript, and then suddenly you're losing track of what that latest version is. If you keep the same title and you just make changes, you could see every single revision that happens. Next thing I want to talk about really quick is I want to talk about adding metadata. Again, metadata is key for having people find your work and connecting your work. This is very similar to the registration metadata. You can add whatever resource type you would like. So say this is a book, a chapter, a data set, an event. You can make any sort of those changes and log that in here. This will be obviously in English. You can make those changes. And I can also add a description. Those are all things that people see when they're searching the OSF that'll help them find you quicker. Again, privacy settings. You can make this public and private at any time. If I say am a private document, all to share a private version of my project with someone else, all I would do is click contributor. Say they are not a contributor and I don't want to add them to the byline of this project. All I would do is go to view only links. That is the same process for registrations. If I click here, click add, I have the option of anonymizing the template for our project and also sending out a version of this. This will create a URL for my private project that is anonymous. I'm going to copy this here and one time I'm just going to pop it in here. I can also send it to all of you here where you'll see an anonymous version. So all the contributors on this are anonymous. Now note that this doesn't anonymize any of the files that are associated with work, but it does help you share your work with funders or anyone that needs to peer review your work that does not need to see who actually is the person who is running your project. One thing quickly I want to talk about is add-ons. So we know that there are so many different tools out there that come to research. So we have citation add-ons, storage add-ons, and the idea being that you can connect any of these different tools that you use, so say Big Share, GitHub, Google Drive, and you can connect them to your OSF project. So to give you an example, I'm going to go to Google Drive and I'm going to enable that connection. Now it's very important that you go through and read how this actually works on the OSF and what that two-way connection actually looks like. So I'm going to confirm it. This will create a successfully changed and it will create a pop-up down here at the bottom where I can configure my add-on. I'm going to import from my Google account. Click Import and this will give me basically a rendering of all of my different files that are on my Google Drive account. I'm going to click the test one because that's the one I've set up for this and I'm going to click Save. You will see a little link down here that says Success Level. The file has been added to your content. I'm going to go back to my main homepage here and down here at the bottom where that file tree was. You will see the original document that we uploaded to the OSF storage versus the Google Drive storage. Now one beautiful thing that I want you all to remember is that anything that is stored outside of the OSF, so say I connected to a Google Drive and Amazon S3, anything like that, that does not go against your storage restrictions on an OSF project. On an OSF project, if it is private, it is 5 gigabytes. You have 5 gigabytes max to put on one of these OSF projects. But if it is public, you have 50. But anything that's stored on your Google Drive or external storage provider, that doesn't go against that limit, which is really a great way of kind of working around that system. Additionally, every component that you create will have its own 5 gigabyte, 50 gigabyte storage limit. So you can in theory have more and more and more. Now one other thing that I really want to point out, a couple more, recent activity, if you're an admin, you have access to seeing all of the changes that happen. So you can look back here and see them when I added the COVID document, added a different test, I connected my Google Drive. You can see the timestamp version of all those things. Now it's not the same as registration, but it does show the recent activity and helps someone say at a PI level coordinate with everyone else and see what's going on. Another aspect that I really want to point out here is your wikis.  It is a text box. I've seen people use it to coordinate between team members. I've seen people use it as a syllabus if they're using an OSF project to run their course or I've seen lab managers use it as a way of ordering products. It's essentially a way of just coordinating with your team members. And it's also versioned. So you can see all those different changes as well. Make sure to add a description, a license to share how you want people to use your work. And again, if you wanted to add, say, those sub projects, those components, you're going to be looking here at add component or linking an existing project. And the process will be essentially the same as creating a project. I can add the contributors from my current project. I can also add the tags, but every one of those sub components will link back to this main component and it'll be found here.


Hello everyone, welcome to the SuperCloud Six. I'm John Furrier here in the Palo Alto City with Dave Vellante and our entire CUBE team presenting our sixth episode of SuperCloud, the topic is AI innovators. We're featuring the hottest founders and startups as well as leading enterprises who are setting the agenda for the next generation infrastructure, software and applications around generative AI and the future of software. Dave, it's great to see you. Thanks for coming flying out and doing an in-person. Again, great lineup. This AI innovator's theme is resonating because who's not an innovator? No one wants to be not an innovator. Of course. I mean, it's always for John, first of all, back in Palo Alto, but this AI thing is real. It's AI everywhere. It's happening. I mean, we're talking about it's powering all the trends, all the markets, and it starts at the bottom of the stack, right? We talked about this in Barcelona on our CUBE pod with companies like NVIDIA and Broadcom and other semiconductor players, but it's really all the way through that stack. It's an orthogonal slice through it. You know, this is our 14th year doing the CUBE and our team. You know, we are, it's like you get caught up in the wave, right? We are on a growth curve that we've never seen before. We've been chronicling the evolution of big data going back to 2010 during the Hadoop days. Cloud scale comes in and we're like in the middle of the storm here. And then all of a sudden, the huge growth waves coming in called generative AI. We were seeing, we were talking about next generation cloud just about a year and a half ago when we started talking about super cloud. But what it's morphed into is really super chips, super applications, super infrastructure and the thing that's going on now with generative AI is that everybody has realized that this is a new game. The game is still the same but it's being played out under new conditions, new infrastructure, new software abstractions, new kinds of chips and server and component configurations like we covered with Broadcom and others like NVIDIA, but the developer action is super robust. Linux Foundation with CUBE Con CNC have you got massive open source development. So all this is going on like at the same time. So you have this perfect storm of innovation and the founders we're going to feature today and the big companies like Uber who have literally crafted what looks like the next generation AI systems. And I think that's the theme that we're seeing this whole systems revolution, systems mindset. And if you look at the trends, we're going to get into it and I want to get the data for you have is the developers moving so fast and the infrastructure changes need to catch up. And that's where the power dynamic. Well, there's so many similarities we talked about this between this wave and previous waves specifically the dot com wave forgetting the cloud for a second. But back then you had a lot of hype. Of course you have a lot of hype today. You had a lot of CapEx build out the CapEx build up back then was a lot of companies that kind of went out of business and companies like Enron and the like and took on a lot of debt today. It's the hyperscalers that are building this out. But nonetheless, it was a situation where it was everywhere, right? AI is everywhere today. The internet was everywhere. The big difference to me, John some of the things that you were talking about you really can't have good AI without good data. So there's not only a transformation going on from AI but there's a data transformation going on where everybody's kind of trying to put data at the core of their business because it's an enabler for quality AI. And then you have this other piece it's not as much the Wild West because you have legal and compliance concerns and they're serious and their potential reputational damage is much higher than it was back in say for instance the Hadoop days where anybody could do what they want and there was not a lot of governance and then people said, okay, hey, we got to rain this in. Now they're raining it in from the start. One of the observations that's come out over the past few months and just recently is the whole growth of this new market tends to be normally bottom up. Developers show some things momentum grows bottom up. But with Genevieve AI because data's involved to your point the crown jewels of the company have to be involved in understanding what Genevieve AI means. What that means is that startups and innovators have to deal with two things. A moving train in terms of the growth trend a Genevieve AI, the new technology, the new infrastructure and then dealing with the sensitive data in the company. So it's not like throwing an experiment out there get a dev team going, you got to do both. You got to hit, you got to hit the innovation on the development side and infrastructure and bring the data that's the crown jewels of the company into the fold in the start. That's unique. I haven't seen that move in a long time. I think that's a power dynamic that frankly gives startups a challenge because you got to go in and sell essentially an enterprise sale to get the data. Because without the data you can't actually show any value with Genevieve. They can't just set up a cluster and say, hey, we're set up for Genevieve AI now what? You got to get the data. And I think that's going to be a challenge and an opportunity for whoever can crack the code on that. And I want to actually, if I may set up the macro we have some data on this from our partners ETR is the first slide that we wanted to show you was kind of AI everywhere what we were talking about. What we look at is as you'll see when we bring that up there's these sectors that are affected by AI. You can see on the vertical axis here it's just spending where people are spending what the momentum is in the horizontal axis is like the size of the market. Think of it that way. But look at ML and AI. It bottomed one month prior to chat GPT and then escalated. And if you go back in time series all these other platforms and sectors were much higher. AI was kind of waning. And then look what's happened. Everything got kind of pushed down below that red line which is like the magic line. And so the point is that we're stealing from other budgets, John, okay? And so people are going to have to start showing ROI or else they're going to get some pressure from the CFOs. It's not like the top line is growing. Okay, let's leave that slide up there. I want to just comment. If you look at the red line, container orchestration, container platforms, cloud computing, the rest that drops below is essentially not impacted negatively by the trend. This points to the data that we have that we were just commenting on that the infrastructure is where the action is right now. And if you look at what will happen next is if you just connect the dots, container orchestration essentially is cloud native stuff. So just put that into a cloud native bucket. Cloud computing will grow and continue to be a power dynamic there. Then as General AI gets better from a scale standpoint, once people figure it out everything below that red line will lift up.  We commented about Cisco and our last Q-Pot, IP telephony and rounding it to the bottom. So context and all that stuff will rise up. And I think that's where the action is going to happen. I think it's kind of below the line right now because people don't know what to do. They don't have yet visibility on the implementation of the use cases. And I think that's going to be the opportunity. Right, so they're experimenting now and then once they figure it out, it's going to, that has to be the way it plays out. It's going to be injected into all these other sectors and that's going to be the rising tide if you change the label ML slash AI at the top there where it's highlighted just call that generative AI that will rise up and that will pull everything up. Thank you, right on. I think the pull will happen. And again, this is going to be the classic rising tide floats all boats and all good, great, great research. Yeah, so thank you for sharing that. So, okay. And then you've also got this other premise that we didn't think back to John. It was just about a little over a year ago we were sitting here talking about this thing. Okay, what is this open AI thing? Are they going to be able to maintain their advantage? You said they would be able to, we'll talk about that in a moment, but it is accelerated so fast, certainly faster than anything we've ever seen before. And then we put forth this idea of the power law. That's the other piece of it, which is, and we're starting to see evidence that people are beginning to do things on-prem. Why do you think that is? Let's talk about that. Well, when we first came up with the power law, if you throw the power law up there, I want to just show that. Yeah, that's the second slide there. Yeah, put the second slide up there, that power law, so we had saw that at the beginning we had predicted that chat GPT and open AI would set the agenda as a large language model, be that kind of the mainstream consumer view of how AI generally plays out from a consumer standpoint. Even with all the hallucination flaws, it was clear that that was going to be a monster opportunity. And then what we were seeing in the data was, is that as you go down the power law, the size of the model, and maybe the size and small scope of it, where the specialty months, where the power law comes in, where the data was strong. So you had high quality data in the long tail of the power law, that would interact with the existing one. That's exactly what played out with the RAG, the retrieval augmentation generation mark, which is the hottest thing happening right now. Retrieval is becoming the killer app. And Jensen said on stage last week at Stanford, he sees that same thing, that these specialty models will be where the inference IP will be. The universal property around inference will come in from the specialty model. And that's that long tail there with all these industries, right? That's what you're talking about here. There's a bunch of that being on-prem, right? Yeah, and so what's going to happen is people will have a choice between using a managed service like OpenAI or Anthropic, or hosting their own Lama, Mestrel, or having their own linguistic or language foundation model. So the hosting will be the challenge. And right now it's more expensive to host than just use a managed service at the short term. So most startups are going to start to experiment with hosting models, and I've been calling clustered systems as the scale gets higher. So you're going to see a huge growth in specialized AI models that are going to be, I won't say proprietary in the sense of not open, but they're going to be intellectual property as data from the enterprises or the startup. So the data quality will be the new intellectual property. And I think that's going to be something that you're going to see people license models through API access, metering it, things like that. So I think you're going to see a surge in the, and here you have no neck and no torso in the tail. I think you're going to see a fattening up of that mid-range model there. You see the long tail extend out and go higher, but you're going to see the neck increase and the belly or the torso increase at the red line. And I want to explain that because that was the huge contribution in addition to other contributions you made to this was that red line pulling up. And you made the point early on, look, open source is really going to pull that torso up and to the right. Like a lot of power laws, that doesn't happen. It's just dominated by a few names. But now we're certainly seeing, I mean, meta estimates that maybe half of the Lama II deployments could be on-prem. The data that we have suggested at least 30% and of course, when you get inside of three letter government agencies, it could be much, much higher than that. But the other point that you made that I really want to emphasize is that domain specificity, that model specificity, AI is going to go to where the data is and there's still a ton of data in healthcare and government and retail and manufacturing that's on-prem that's never going to necessarily be into the cloud. Not that there's not going to be a ton of activity in the cloud. There is, that's where a lot of it is today. But there's no reason to try to shove all that data back into the cloud, rather bring the AI to the data. And if the tools are there, that's going to be a very successful model. The thing about that is that the cloud, it's all cloud operations. So what the big trend is, is that it's not just cloud, public cloud, it's on-premise cloud, it's edge cloud, it's actually cloud operations. That's why we saw container optimization, container orchestration, high up on the list with Genevieve AI that pull on the other slide. You're going to see that interact. And with the power law, what's going to happen, we believe in the research we're seeing, is that you're going to see specialty models in the torso and the tail interact with the large language models. And you're going to see an interaction between models. You're going to see models talking to each other and sharing data. You're going to see a model for security and model for other things. So I think the power law will end up happening. The ironic thing was, Jensen actually acknowledged the power law on his stand for videos like this. Everybody is like, hey, it's playing out. Well, that's what the value is. We were really on on that. Once people see the value of Genevieve AI, they go, I see value because they have the proprietary data. When they have their own data that's in good form, they can see instant benefits. And that's why they're going to see a lot of interaction with the bigger models. Because by models working together, they can see instant value. And they go, wow, that's transformative. It literally is a step function change and they're going to throw more money at it. The next question is going to be, what's the spend? How do I manage my spend? What's it going to cost me? And do I get more value revenue-wise out of it or cost reduction? So you're going to start to see questions like, how much am I saving enough? How much am I saving? And how much am I making?  Well, and that's part of the reason why we've invited Uber in today to really understand how they're using AI, Walmart as well. These are two big examples of companies that are actually getting ROI out of AI. I think most companies are not, to be quite honest with you. But the other thing I want to bring up, and you and I have talked about this a lot, of course, Elon is in the news again, pursuing open AI, calling them closed AI and there's a lot of kerfuffle there. But the quality of these models, while they're increasing very, very rapidly, open AI still has a lead. And I want to bring up the third slide now, if you could, just to give you a sense as to how big that gap is. This is essentially the vertical axis is intent to engage. So it's activity and engagement. And the horizontal axis is mind-sharing. Look at it in the upper right. I had put a red bar around it because they're literally off the charts. Look at the gap between it's anthropic and in cohere and character AI and all the other, many of the open source. And look at that giant gap. I inferred where Lama would be from some other data that we have from ETR. But that gap is enormous. And so people are saying that a lot of people are waiting for the next generation of NVIDIA chips to train, to get beyond GPT-4, the H200s. But open AI is really doing great right now. And a lot of people are engaging with them, not that these other models aren't ultimately going to catch up, but they've got the lead right now and they have a lot of the data to lean on. What are your thoughts on this gap? Well, I think, first of all, they're running away with it mainly because they had the lead and they're going to continue to push it. And Microsoft. And the Microsoft factor, they're monetizing quickly. So I think that's going to be a great sign. I think anthropics going to do well too. I think Lama and MeScrub will rise. I think those will be the big three. Cohere will be in the mix. Jasper, I'm not too sure about, but I think anthropics, because of the AWS relationship and their other clouds, you're going to see them pull in there. So I think they'll move fast in on open AI, but the open AI will be, how can they extend that lead? And I think that's going to be in this generation of open, general AI, the winners need to have the whole, everyone's talking about what's the mode, right? What's the mode of the company? Well, the mode speed. So if you look at open AI, and we said this last time, the way they're going to win is just continuing to keep the distance between them and the number two. So in their rear view mirror, they're going to look at Anthropic and Lama and MeScrub. Lama mainly is dangerous because Facebook is going to be probably a powerhouse, a hoster of scale. And I think Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, Facebook will be infrastructure of choice. Maybe even Oracle, we mentioned that last night at dinner. These are going to be the infrastructures that people are going to run on. And the power that they have is going to be to the proportion of like how we think about electricity. And I think that's going to be really interesting conversation because that's going to be where the discussion is. Are they too big? Yeah. And will that stifle innovation? My feeling the power law shows and those graphs show that there will be a rising tide. So I think it's not going to be stifle innovation, but it does beg the question, what are they enabling? Well, what do they have a lock-in spec on that? And if you look at the CapEx spend, again, this is a big difference between the dot-com bubble and now is the CapEx is really being driven by the hyperscalers. In fact, if you look at Nvidia's last quarter, their quarterly revenue is about half of the CapEx spend in the quarter, which is pretty amazing. Because obviously people are spending a lot. These hyperscalers are spending a lot on GPUs. But having said all that, John, you've got real innovation going on. And Amazon's going for optionality. They're going for tooling. They're going for features. And that playbook has worked for them. And they're going to try to eliminate the non-differential to heavy lifting in AI. Google, despite its troubles, is obviously putting a lot of investment in AI. It's got great tech. And then Microsoft did just a brilliant move there. So, and then you have this whole entire other ecosystem saying, hey, we want innovation alternatives to Nvidia. We want innovation alternatives to open AI. And Microsoft, so the entire industry is funding this thing. And that's why the innovation is going to come. Well, there's a couple of factors. The funding, the resources required to do it are going to be constrained and contested. So, that's why- You mean like GPUs? Well, GPUs, but also that's why you see all the clouds taking equity positions in these deals as basically barter for the cost. And they're going to trade their resource. I was talking to startup, we're going to have on here, talking about cloud insurance, like flood insurance. What if you can't get your GPUs? We'll guarantee performance. So you start to see a whole financial modeling around, not just cost optimization, but cost management, cost strategy. So that's going to be the action on the cost side. I guess we have coming in from the startup side, mainly around data. Venkat from Rockset, Kyle from One House. We got NVIDIA, big name coming in Snowflake. We got Uber, Zscaler. We got Neo4j on the database side. Single store, MongoDB Ventures, YLabs doing kind of like this new, I would call a new observability category that's emerging around AIOPS. I won't call it observability, but it's because it's not true observability. And then just a ton of startups doing innovators. This is an innovator's market and the innovators will win. And what we're looking for is, how are these innovators and their customers applying AI? That's what we're going to hear from Uber and Walmart. Really interesting what Walmart's done with their cloud native platform. They're super cloud, if you will. They've built an abstraction layer called Element over it. That's where all the AI happens in the ML. Same thing with Uber, how they're evolving their platform. Walmart. Yeah, it's going to be really an amazing day here, John. AI innovators, as we see them, are the folks making it happen. They're the ones who are investing and on the cutting edge and we're going to categorize them all out here and continue this here at super cloud six. And AI innovators, we're going to continue on the 19th. We're going to have an addendum to this program. So stay with us. As we kick off super cloud six, we'll be right back after this break.