Chunni Lal vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16878 Raj

(1 of 4) [CRLR-738/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 738/2021

Chunni Lal S/o Sukhram Bishnoi, aged about 32 Years, R/o Degaon, Karda Police Station, District Jalore, Presently R/o A/13- 4, Khasra No. 287, Sant Khateshwar Nagar, Kuri Bhagtasani, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Raj Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Bhati, P.P

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

Order

12/11/2021

The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision petition

under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C against the order dated 19.07.2021

passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases No.2,

Chittorgarh in Criminal Case No. 176/2021 pertaining to FIR No.

179/2018 registered at Police Station Shambhupura, District

Chittorgarh for the offences under Sections 8/15, 8/18 & 8/25 of

the N.D.P.S. Act, whereby the prayer to release the seized

Fortuner car on supurdaginama in favour of the petitioner, has

been rejected.

As per prosecution story, 100 Kgs of poppy husk/straw

contained in 5 plastic bags and 100 Kgs of Opium was recovered

from the Fortuner car bearing registration No. GJ-01-KQ-6444.

After investigation, the police found that the petitioner was owner

of the vehicle, who purchased said vehicle from its registered

(2 of 4) [CRLR-738/2021]

owner Kalpesh before the alleged incident, for which 'No Objection

Certificate' was obtained from the Gujarat Motor Vehicle

Department (State Transport Department), Ahmedabad on

04.05.2018. The trial court has rejected the application filed

under Section 451 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking interim

custody of the subject vehicle on the ground of severity of offence

and possessing the narcotic substance by the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record as well the order impugned.

Learned counsel for the petitioner while praying for interim

custody of the subject vehicle submits that the petitioner is owner

of the Fortuner car, which he had purchased from its registered

owner and therefore, he is entitled for interim custody of the

vehicle.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor while supporting the

order impugned passed by the trial court, prays for rejection of

the revision petition.

Having heard the rival submissions and perusal of the record,

in the considered opinion of this Court, the interim custody of the

vehicle alleged to be used in committing the offence of NDPS Act

cannot be denied on the ground of severity of offence. It is also

settled legal proposition of law that interim custody of the vehicle

cannot be denied on the ground that it is liable to be confiscated,

in case the offence is proved against the accused. The vehicle in

the present case was purchased by the petitioner from its

registered owner Kalpesh before the alleged incident and 'No

Objection Certificate' was also issued by the Gujarat Motor Vehicle

Department (State Transport Department), Ahmedabad, which is

(3 of 4) [CRLR-738/2021]

on record. As per prosecution story, the vehicle was found in the

possession of the petitioner.

Keeping in mind the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat

reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, there is no reason to deny

interim custody of the vehicle to the owner or person entitled to

get possession of the vehicle. If the vehicle is allowed to be kept

in the police station for an indefinite period, then value of the

vehicle shall be diminished substantially and it may not remain in

usable condition. In the above circumstances, the prayer of the

petitioner deserves to be allowed.

Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned

Order dated 19.07.2021 passed by learned trial court is set aside

and Fortuner Car bearing registration No. GJ-01-KQ-6444 is

ordered to be released on 'supurdagi' in favour of the petitioner till

completion of the trial on the following conditions:-

a) the petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 3,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court undertaking to produce the vehicle Fortuner car bearing registration No. GJ-01-KQ- 6444 in the Court as and when required to do so.

b) the petitioner shall get the Fortuner Car photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the case.

c) the personal bond of the petitioner and bonds of

(4 of 4) [CRLR-738/2021]

sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and his sureties and the bond of sureties shall further carry the photographs of persons identifying them before the Court, which is with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

(d) the petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the Fortuner car and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

(e) the petitioner will not allow the vehicle Fortuner car bearing registration No. GJ-01-KQ-6444 to be used for any antisocial activities including for the purpose of carrying narcotics which may constitute offence under the N.D.P.S. Act.

(f) before releasing the vehicle the trial court shall verify the original documents of the vehicle.

(g) the petitioner shall get transferred the registration certificate in his name within a period of one month from the order, on the basis of No Objection Certificate (NOC) and produce the same before the trial court itself.

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

10-rahul arya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)