[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avdesh vs State Of Haryana on 19 January, 2026
Author: Rajesh Bhardwaj
Bench: Rajesh Bhardwaj
CRM-M-2770-2026 1
179 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-2770-2026
Date of decision : 19.01.2026
Avdesh .....Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana ..... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
***
Present :- Mr. Saleem Ahmed, Advocate
for the petitioner.
RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of impugned
order dated 27.08.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned JMIC, Palwal
vide which an application for releasing the vehicle on Superdari was
dismissed in a case FIR No.965, dated 26.12.2024, under Sections 13(2),
17(1) of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamwardhan Act,
2015 (for short, 'the Act'), Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 11 of
Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1960, registered at Police Station
Sector 58, District Faridabad and order dated 13.10.2025 passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, vide which the criminal
revision petition filed by the petitioner was also dismissed.
2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR. He
submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing
registration No.DL-1-LAF-9801, which has been taken into custody by
the police. He submits that the petitioner filed an application before
learned ACJM, Palwal for releasing the said vehicle on superdari,
1 of 4
however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 27.08.2025 on the
ground that the Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the question of
posssession, delivery, disposal, release of the vehicle. He further submits
that the said vehicle is the only source of income of the petitioner to earn
his livelihood for his family, which fact has not been appreciated by
learned ACJM, Palwal. He further submits that learned Revisional Court
has also equally failed to appreciate the same and has illegallay dismissed
the revision filed by the petitioner. He has relied upon the judgments
Ajhar Husain vs. State of Haryana, in CRM-M-14463-2019, decided on
14.01.2020 and Haseen Ahmed vs. State of Haryana, in CRM-M-22136-
2024 decided on 07.05.2024 and has submitted that the view taken by the
learned trial Court is totally against the statutory provisions and the law
settled. Thus, it is submitted that the vehicle bearing registration No.DL-1-
LAF-9801 be released to the petitioner on superdari.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf
of the State. He has submitted that the vehicle in question was taken into
police custody in FIR No.965, dated 26.12.2024, which was found to be
involved in commission of offence. He submits that the said vehicle has
been confiscated/seized by the SDM, Ballabgarh, Faridabad.
5. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record,
it is apparent that the vehicle in question was seized by the Police under
the Act and confiscation proceedings are also initiated by SDM,
Ballabhgarh. This Court time and again has held that the vehicle seized
under the Act, can be released on superdari to its registered owner, if it is
likely to deteriorate by prolonged retention in police custody, and if the
2 of 4
registered owner satisfies the conditions imposed by the Court. The trial
of the case will take sufficient long time and no purpose will be served by
keeping the vehicle parked in the police station which is converting into
junk with the passage of time. Since December, 2024, the said vehicle is
in possession of the police and its value is being depreciated due to non
usage. The vehicle is said to be only source of income of the petitioner to
earn his livelihood.
7. Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Mainpal vs. State of
Haryana, in CWP-19153-2016 decided on 30.05.2017 while dealing with
the same issue involved in the present case, held as under:-
"The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to
challenge Section 17 of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan
and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (for short, "the Act") which
provides for confiscation of the vehicle used in any offence
committed under the Act.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that the process for
amendment of the Act is in progress and he has instructions
from Dr. Rajbir Vats, Gaushala Development Officer,
Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Panchkula to
state that the vehicle in question namely, UP-11AT-1273
Ashoka Leyland Pick Up may be released to the petitioner on
superdari to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Yamuna Nagar.
In view of the stand taken by learned counsel for the State,
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the main writ
petition can also be disposed of in case the State is in process
of making amendment in the Act vires of which is under
challenge.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the present
petition is disposed of at this stage as regards vires of Section
17 of the Act is concerned, as amendment thereof is under
3 of 4
consideration.
In view of the stand taken with reference to release of
vehicle, it is directed that the same shall be released to the
petitioner on superdari subject to the satisfaction of Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar."
7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case on
the anvil of law settled, the impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by
learned ACJM, Palwal and the order dated 13.10.2025 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, are set aside and the vehicle in
question is ordered to be released on superdari to its registered owner, to
the satisfaction of the trial Court, which will be free to impose any
condition if finds necessary in the fitness of the circumstances. The State
would be at liberty to avail its remedy in case the petitioner is found to
have violated any of the conditions of superdari.
8. Petition stands allowed.
19.01.2026 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ )
sharmila JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
