Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Maheshpari Natupari Goswami vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7211 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7211 Guj
Judgement Date : 3 October, 2023

Gujarat High Court
Maheshpari Natupari Goswami vs State Of Gujarat on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Sandeep N. Bhatt
                                                                                               NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/SCR.A/5812/2021                                           ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

                                                                                                undefined




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (POSSESSION OF MUDDAMAL)
                      NO. 5812 of 2021

==========================================================
                         MAHESHPARI NATUPARI GOSWAMI
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.NAYANKUMAR V SHUKLA(10184) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                                   Date : 03/10/2023

                                    ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed this petition to invoke inherent

jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India read with Section 451 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure to release the muddamal vehicle being Bolero Pick-

up bearing RTO Registration No.GJ-14-X-3442 in connection

with the FIR being I-CR.No.17 of 2019 registered with

Vinchhiya Police Station, Rajkot Rural for the offence

punishable under the provisions of the Gujarat Animal

Preservation Act, Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960

and under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

3. 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 extraordinary jurisdiction under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India on suitable terms and

conditions.

4. 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.

5. 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

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.

6. Having heard the arguments advanced by both the

sides, while determining the other issues raised by the

learned APP 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.

7. 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.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

(b) In case of Saramanbhai Devsibhai Barad vs. State of

Gujarat order dated 10.06.2020 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 vs. State of Gujarat

order dated20.07.2020 passed in Special Criminal Application

No. 2896 of 2020.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

(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

8. This Court notices that the petitioner is the owner of

the muddmal vehicle and he is an accused in FIR, and

considering the decision of Sunderbhai Ambalal 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 the accused and

the 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.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

9. Resultantly, this petition is allowed, and the orders

dated 10.02.2020 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge

and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vinchhiya, is set aside.

The authority concerned is directed to release the vehicle of

petitioner, being Bolero Pick-up bearing RTO Registration

No.GJ-14-X-3442 on the terms and conditions that the

petitioner:

1. shall furnish a solvent surety of the amount

equivalent to the value of the vehicle 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.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/5812/2021 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2023

undefined

10. Before handing over the possession of the vehicle to the

petitioner, necessary photographs shall be taken and a

detailed Panchnama in that regard, if not already drawn,

shall also be drawn for the purpose of trial.

11. 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.

(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) R.S. MALEK

 
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 : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter