Pushpa Bai vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42196)

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 9023 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 October, 2024

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Pushpa Bai vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42196) on 16 October, 2024

[2024:RJ-JD:42196]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6052/2024

Pushpa Bai W/o Lt. Ramchandra Anjana, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o Veerawali, Ps Arnod, Dist. Pratapgarh, Raj.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Khiv Das
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, PP


         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order 16/10/2024

1. Under challenge before this Court is an order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, District Pratapgarh in Criminal Misc. Case No.124/2024 (Special Session Case No.106/2023), arising out of FIR No.152/2023, lodged at P.S. Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh, for the offences under Section 8/15 and 8/29 of NDPS Act, wherein 700kg poppy husk was recovered. Vide impugned order, release of the vehicle in question (Tractor) on Superdari bearing registration No.RJ-09-RC- 9645 has been declined.

2. Briefly, the relevant facts as pleaded in the petition are that the petitioner submitted an application under Section 503 BNSS, 2023 before the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Sirohi, stating that her vehicle, a Tractor Trolley (No.RJ-09-RC-9645), was seized in connection with FIR No. 152/2023 at Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh, for the offences under Section 8/15 and 8/29 of NDPS Act on 26.05.2023.

(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 10:54:02 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:42196] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6052/2024] 2.1. It is averred that the registered owner of the aforementioned tractor was one Pankaj Anjana, who sold the tractor along with a trolley to the petitioner's late husband through an agreement to sell dated 16.12.2022. However, her husband passed away on 15.03.2023, before the ownership could be transferred. It is stated that a charge sheet has already been filed, and there is no further requirement for the tractor in the investigation. The petitioner is a poor and illiterate widow, and her sole source of livelihood is agriculture, for which she requires the tractor in question. Therefore, the petitioner seeks the release of the vehicle in question through the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's husband is a bona fide purchaser and she has no role to play in the transportation of the contraband (700kg of poppy husk) which was allegedly being transported in the tractor trolley.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the instant criminal Misc. petition on the ground that vehicle is a case property.

5. Vehicle was impounded on 26.05.2023 and ever-since parked in police custody and needless to say it is deteriorating by each passing day and would turn into a complete junk by the time trial is concluded.

6. Reference may be had to the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in AIR 2003 SC 638 and the order dated 18.11.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.2005/2022 [SLP (Crl.) No.7280/2022) titled as Sainaba Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr., wherein, the vehicle involved in a crime under NDPS Act was directed to be released on (Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 10:54:02 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:42196] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6052/2024] terms and conditions to be determined by the Special Court. In view thereof, the instant Petition is also allowed. Adopting the same reasoning as assigned in the judgment, ibid, this Court deems it just and appropriate to release the vehicle in question in favour of the petitioner on interim custody till conclusion of the trial provided she furnishes a Supurdarinama and surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Court below.

7. In the parting, I may hasten to add that the learned trial Court shall assess the authenticity of agreement to sell dated 16.12.2022 executed between the registered owner (Pankaj Aanjana) and late Ramchandra Anjana (deceased husband of the petitioner herein) before releasing the vehicle in question in favour of the petitioner on Supurdarinama on usual terms.

(ARUN MONGA),J 61-DhananjayS/-

(Downloaded on 19/10/2024 at 10:54:02 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)