Ravindra Kumar Son Of Mahipal vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 13 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2740/2021

Ravindra Kumar Son Of Mahipal, Resident Of Village Dobra,
Police Station Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj).
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                           Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                   ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Virender Godara
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. F.R. Meena, PP



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                           Order

03/01/2022

By way of filing of the instant miscellaneous petition,

challenge has been made to the order dated 26.03.2021 passed

by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pilani, District Jhunjhunu in FIR

No. 09/2018 registered at Police Station Surajgarh, Distt.

Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan whereby the prayer made by the petitioner

for releasing the vehicle in question (Pick-up) bearing registration

No. RJ18GA3448, has been declined.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after

conducting thorough investigation in the matter, it is concluded by

the investigating agency that some other person had misused the

vehicle while it was lying in an abandoned condition and thus, a

negative Final Report has been submitted.

Learned counsel further submits that in this view of the

matter that the involvement of the vehicle in question as well as

knowledge of the petitioner regarding use of vehicle in

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-2740/2021]

contravention of provision of Rajasthan Excise Act has not been

found by the Investigating Agency and the petitioner, being the

registered owner of the vehicle in question, is best entitled to get

back the possession and the fetter contained in Section 69 of the

Rajasthan Excise Act, would not come into play.

Learned Public Prosecutor admits the fact that a negative

Final Report has been submitted wherein the involvement of the

petitioner has not been found.

In this view, looking to the fact that the vehicle is lying in

open in Police station premises and is subject to deterioration and

natural decay and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of

Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 283], the petition is allowed and this

Court deem it appropriate to release the vehicle in favour of the

petitioner provided he furnishes a Supurdaginama of Rs.

5,00,000/- and a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the

Magistrate concerned.

(FARJAND ALI),J

SAHIL/32

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)