Gurnam Singh vs Ut Of J&K
2021 Latest Caselaw 1454 j&K

                                                             Sr. No. 64
     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU

                                                     CRM (M) No. 715/2021


Gurnam Singh                                             .....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                               Through :- Mr. R. S. Parihar, Advocate

                        v/s

UT of J&K                                                         .....Respondent(s)

                               Through :- Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy. AG


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

                               JUDGMENT

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under section

482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 04.10.2021 passed by the

learned Principal Sessions Judge, Udhampur (hereinafter to be

referred as the trial court) to the extent of imposing condition of

furnishing bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/- for release of vehicle

(Truck) bearing registration number PB11AD-3405.

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in

question and a false and frivolous FIR bearing No. 287/2021 under

sections 8/15 of the NDPS Act was registered, as the truck in

question was used for illegally carrying/transporting of contraband

(poppy straw) weighing 12.650 kgs. It is further submitted that the

truck in question is the only source of income of the petitioner and

being a poor man it is quite impossible for him to furnish a bank

guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/-

3. It is further stated that the petitioner is the registered owner of the

said vehicle and had approached the trial court for release of the

same. The learned trial court vide order dated 04.10.2021 (supra)

directed release of the truck bearing No. PB11AD-3405 on

supurdnama of the registered owner, subject to fulfillment of certain

conditions and one of the conditions figuring at Sr. No. 10 (vii) is

reproduced as under:

(vii) "he shall furnish a bank guarantee to the tune of Rs. one lac for due compliance of these conditions."

4. The petitioner through the medium of present petition has assailed

order dated 04.10.2021 primarily on the ground that the aforesaid

condition imposed by the learned trial court is not justifiable.

5. Learned counsels for both the sides submit that appropriate orders

may be passed in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC

283.

6. Heard and perused the record.

7. The only purpose for releasing of the vehicle is to ensure that the

vehicle remains, roadworthy otherwise, if the same is allowed to

remain in police custody, the same shall lose its utility. The learned

trial court has already imposed certain conditions while releasing the

vehicle in question and the purpose is to ensure that the vehicle is not

disposed of by the person on whose supurdnama the vehicle is kept

and the same is produced before the court as and when required.

8. The Apex Court in Sunderbahi Ambalal Desai's case (supra) has

held that:

"It is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications, for return of such vehicles."

9. The condition of imposing bank guarantee by the learned trial court

is harsh, when other conditions have already been imposed by the

trial court. So this Court is of the considered view that the said

condition is required to be modified and the petitioner shall furnish

two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

10. For all what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed and

the condition of furnishing of bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/-

imposed by the learned trial court vide order dated 04.10.2021 is

modified to the extent that the petitioner shall furnish two sureties of

Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court.

(Rajnesh Oswal) Judge JAMMU 12.11.2021 Karam Chand/Secy Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No