Pukhraj vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 17737 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 945/2021

Pukhraj S/o Mangnaram, Aged About 24 Years, B/c Vishnoi, R/o Dhatarwalo Ki Dhani Bheemsagar, Tehsil Osiyan Dist. Jodhpur.

                                                  ----Petitioner
                            Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Bhanwaru Ram
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Sudheer Tak, P.P



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

                                      Order

25/11/2021

The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision petition

under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C against the Order dated

28.10.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases,

Phalodi, District Jodhpur in Criminal Miscellaneous application No.

652/2021 (Sessions Case No.14/2021) pertaining to FIR No.

138/2020 registered at Police Station Lohawat, District Jodhpur for

the offences under Sections 8/15 of the N.D.P.S. Act, whereby the

prayer to release the seized vehicle i.e. Truck bearing registration

No. RJ-19-GE-9243 on supurdaginama in favour of the petitioner,

has been rejected.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record as well order impugned.

As per prosecution story, on 24.06.2020 at 03:15 AM during

nakabandi a truck bearing registration No. RJ-19-GE-9243 was

stopped by the police officers and after search 52 bags of poppy

straw weighing 948 kg was found from the truck; truck was seized

(2 of 2) [CRLR-945/2021]

under FIR No. 138/2020 for the offences under Section 8/15 of

the N.D.P.S Act.

The impugned order passed by learned trial court in rejecting

the prayer of the petitioner to hand over the custody of the vehicle

to the petitioner is not as per law. Learned trial court

misconstrued the judgment referred by the applicant and rejected

the application of the petitioner. It is well settled that interim

custody of the seized vehicle containing narcotics substance

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

after conviction. The vehicle shall remain of no use after lapse of

considerable time, which is likely to be consumed in completion of

the trial.

Keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of

Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, the interim custody of

the vehicle should not be denied.

Consequently, the present revision petition is allowed. The

impugned Order dated 28.10.2021 passed by the trial court

rejecting the application of the petitioner under Section 451 of

Cr.P.C is quashed and set aside. The Truck bearing registration No.

RJ-19-GE-9243 is ordered to be released on interim custody on

usual terms and conditions, which the trial court deems fit after

satisfying with the original documents and after taking on record

the photographs of the vehicle.

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J 25-rahul arya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)