Tuesday, 02, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Bachala Ismail Yakub vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 2158 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2158 Guj
Judgement Date : 9 March, 2023

Gujarat High Court
Bachala Ismail Yakub vs State Of Gujarat on 9 March, 2023
Bench: Samir J. Dave
     R/SCR.A/4374/2022                                   ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4374 of 2022

==========================================================
                                BACHALA ISMAIL YAKUB
                                        Versus
                                  STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRADIP J PATEL(5896) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE

                                   Date : 09/03/2023

                                    ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of

rule for and on behalf of respondent - State.

2. The petitioner has filed this petition to

invoke inherent jurisdiction vested under Articles

226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and read

with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

to release the muddamal vehicle i.e. TATA 407 TEMPO

bearing RTO Registration No.GJ-07-Y-3925 in

connection with the FIR being CR.No.II-213 of 2019

registered with Godhra "B" Division Police

Station, District- Panchmahal for the offence

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

punishable under Sections 279 of IPC and under

sections 177, 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act and

under sections 6(A)(4)(3), 8(2) of Gujarat Animal

Preservation Amednment Act, 2017.

3. Heard learned learned advocates for the

parties

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner has

submitted that the muddamal vehicle has been

detained by the investigating officer and that if

the interim custody of the vehicle is not given,

serious prejudice would be caused to the petitioner

as the muddamal vehicle would get substantially

damaged by the time trial gets concluded and

probably by that time the value of the muddamal

vehicle may also become 'Nil' as the vehicle is

lying under the open sky in different climatic

conditions. It was further submitted that this

Court has ordered release of muddamal vehicles. It

was accordingly urged that this Court may direct

release of the muddamal vehicle in exercise of the

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India on suitable terms and

conditions.

5. It is also contended that as per various

judgments of this Court and Hon'ble Apex Court in

case of Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of

Gujarat reported in AIR 2003 SC 638 and in case of

Smt. Basava Kom Dyaman Gauda Patil Vs. State of

Mysore reported in (1977) 4 SCC 358, wherein the

captioned mudamal has been released.

6. Per contra, learned APP has heavily opposed

and placed reliance upon the judgment dated

18.12.2017 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in case of Jhala Ghanshyamsingh Mobatsingh

vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal

Application No. 9745 of 2017. Learned APP further

contended that the order passed by the learned

trial Court is just and proper.

7. Having heard the arguments advanced by both

the sides, while determining the other issues

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

raised by the learned APP with reference to Mines

Act and also with reference to judgments of this

Court and judgment dated 18.12.2017 in case of

Jhala Ghanshyamsingh Mobatsingh vs. State of

Gujarat and other provisions of the said Act and

referring to that and the issues to be determined

in future in appropriate proceedings being

contentious issue, this Court is not inclined to

enter into that arena in the present matter and

instead exercised powers vested under Articles 226

and 227 of the Constitution of India.

8. This Court has also assistance of judgments

and orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court, which are as under:

(a) In case of Vipul Roshan Kumar Shah vs.

State of Gujarat order dated 15.06.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

6957 of 2019.

(b) In case of Saramanbhai Devsibhai Barad

vs. State of Gujarat order dated 10.06.2020

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

8601 of 2019.

(c) In case of Mahesh Mansukhbhai Dholaria

vs. State of Gujarat order dated 19.08.2019

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

7806 of 2019.

(d) In case of Anirrudhsinh Pravinsinh Jadeja

vs. State of Gujarat order dated 10.08.2018

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

6039 of 2018.

(e) In case of Dilipbhai Ramanbhai Chaudhari

(Legal Heirs of Late Ramanbhai Chaudhari) vs.

State of Gujarat order dated 14.08.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

3387 of 2020.

(f) In case of Smitaben Kalpeshbhai Chaudhary

vs. State of Gujarat order dated 20.07.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

2851 of 2020.

(g) In case of Jignasha Kalpeshbhai Prajapati

thro POA Kalpeshbhai Bhagwanbhai Prajapati

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

vs. State of Gujarat order dated20.07.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

2896 of 2020.

(h) In case of Devabhai Ranchhodbhai Ahir vs.

State of Gujarat order dated 20.07.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

2853 of 2020.

(i) In case of Vipul Roshan Kumar Shah vs.

State of Gujarat order dated 15.06.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

6957 of 2019.

(j) In case of Vipul Roshan Kumar Shah vs.

State of Gujarat order dated 22.07.2020

passed in Special Criminal Application No.

7143 of 2019

9. This Court notices that the said muddmal

vehicle was meant for transfer of material from

legal mines and further this offence was not as per

instructions of present petitioner to the driver,

considering the decision of Sunderbhai Ambalal

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

Desai Vs. State of Gujarat (Supra), wherein Hon'ble

Apex Court lamented scenario that vehicle having

unattended and becoming junk within the premises of

Police Station, further the captioned muddamal

vehicle was used by employee of the petitioner and

petitioner is suffering from many months,

therefore, bearing in mind all such facts and

circumstances, the petitioner has to be given back

his muddamal vehicle with few conditions.

10. Resultantly, this petition is allowed, and the

order dated 06.02.2021 passed by the learned 3rd

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class,

Godhra and the order dated 07.07.2021 passed by the

learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahal

are set aside. The authority concerned is directed

to release the vehicle of petitioner, TATA 407

TEMPO bearing RTO Registration No.GJ-07-Y-3925 in

the terms and conditions that the petitioner:

1. shall furnish a solvent surety of the

amount equivalent to the value of the vehicle

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

in question as per the value disclosed in the

seizure memo or panchnama.

2. Shall file an undertaking before the trial

Court that prior to alienation or transfer in

any mode or manner, prior permission of the

concerned Court shall be taken till

conclusion of the trial,

3. Shall also file an undertaking to produce

the vehicle as an when directed by the trial

Court

4. If the I.O. finds use of vehicle in such

anti-social, illegal activity by the present

petitioner then this order shall stand cancel

and the vehicle will be seized.

5. The trial Court shall verify the ownership

of the vehicle before releasing the same.

11. Before handing over the possession of the

vehicle to the petitioner, necessary photographs

shall be taken and a detailed Panchnama in that

R/SCR.A/4374/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2023

regard, if not already drawn, shall also be drawn

for the purpose of trial.

12. If, the I.O. finds it necessary, Videography

of the vehicle also shall be done. Expenses towards

the photographs and the videography shall be BORNE

by the petitioner. Rule is made absolute. Direct

Service is permitted.

(SAMIR J. DAVE,J) MEHUL B. TUVAR

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter