Arpit Kothifoda vs State Of Haryana

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18749 P&H
Judgement Date : 22 October, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Arpit Kothifoda vs State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2024

Author: Anoop Chitkara

Bench: Anoop Chitkara

                                            Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138577



CRM-M-37569-2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                    AT CHANDIGARH

                                                           CRM-M-37569-2024
                                                           Reserved on: 14.10.2024
                                                           Date of Decision: 22.10.2024

Arpit Kothifoda                                                   ......... Pe  oner

                                         Versus

State of Haryana                                                  ......... Respondent



CORAM:            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present           Mr. Gaurav Tyagi, Advocate
                  for the pe  oner.

                  Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, D.A.G., Haryana.

                                 ****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)
 FIR No.       Dated          Police Sta4on             Sec4ons
 257           09.07.2017     Kundli,      District 15, 29 of NDPS Act (Sec ons 420,467,
                              Sonipat               468, 471 IPC added later on)


1. The present pe on has been filed under Sec on 528 read with Sec on 498 BNSS for releasing the case property i.e truck bearing Registra on No. MP-44-GA-1168 to the pe oner on Sapurdari, as the trial in above cap oned FIR has already been concluded vide judgment dated 22.03.2023.

2. Counsel for the pe oner submits that the pe oner is neither an accused nor a convict in the present case. Although, the pe oner's father was named in the FIR but he has been acqui<ed by the trial Court vide judgment dated 22.03.2023. The accused, who were convicted, namely, Suresh, Mukesh and Deepak Singhal @ Chikna had filed appeals against the said judgment, which are pending before this Court. He further submits that the vehicle i.e. truck bearing Registra on No. MP-44GA-1168 is s ll under the custody of the police sta on Kundli, Sonipat for the last 07 years.

3. State counsel opposes the present pe on on the ground that a very large quan ty of poppy husk was recovered from the above said vehicle and the quan ty falls in commercial quan ty. He further submits that present pe on is not maintainable, as appeal lies against the final judgment or pe oner has to file an applica on for superdari in pending appeals.

1

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 27-10-2024 03:34:06 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138577 CRM-M-37569-2024

4. It is not disputed that appeals No. CRA-S-1216-2023, CRA-S-1387-2023 and CRA- S-1114-2023 filed by convicts, namely, Suresh, Mukesh and Deepak against the said judgment are pending before this Court. It would be appropriate if the pe oner files an applica on in aforesaid appeals for release of vehicle on superdari or file appeal against the judgment whereby vehicle in ques on was confiscated. However, there is no averments in the pe on qua the por on of judgment whereby vehicle in ques on was confiscated.

5. The present pe on stands disposed of being not maintainable with liberty to file an applica on or appeal on the same grounds which is pending before this Court, filing and disposal of the present pe on shall not come in the way of pe oner while filing fresh pe on. All pending miscellaneous applica ons, if any, stand disposed of.



                                                                (ANOOP CHITKARA)
                                                                    JUDGE

22.10.2024
Jyo -II


                          Whether speaking/reasoned           Yes/No

                              Whether Reportable              Yes/No




                                                   2
                                          2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 27-10-2024 03:34:07 :::