Jitesh Meena S/O Shri Chothilal vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2352 Raj/2

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

         S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7274/2021
Jitesh Meena S/o Shri Chothilal, Aged About 22 Years, Resident
Of Dabir, Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli (Raj).
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                  ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Veerendra Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP Mr. Omveer Singh Saini, Adv. on behalf of Registered Owner

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order

15/03/2022

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

praying therein that the order dated 22.10.2021 passed by

Learned Court Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act

and Commission For Protection Of Child Rights Act, Karauli, be set

aside, whereby the said court refused to release vehicle Toyota

Car No. RJ-14-TE-3804 to the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the

vehicle in question is under taxi permit and refusal of release

would render the petitioner jobless which would create hardship

not only to the petitioner but all other dependent family member

also.

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

presently vehicle in question is lying in Police Station and condition

of the vehicle be rusted day by day. No purpose will be fulfilled to

keep the vehicle in police station. Whenever court's order to

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-7274/2021]

produce the vehicle, he would produce the vehicle before the

Court, So, present petition be allowed.

Learned counsel for the registered owner of the vehicle

submits he has no objection if the vehicle is given to the

petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10

SCC 283, to contend that the Supreme court has held that the

vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked in the police

station as same shall gather rust and shall not remain useful.

Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case

of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), present petition is

allowed and the trial court is directed to release the vehicle seized

as case property by imposing following conditions:-

a) That the petitioner shall keep the vehicle so released intact and

shall not change their identification.

b) That the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when trial

court requires the same for proposed identification of the case

property.

c) That the petitioner shall execute Supurdaginama/indemnity

bond and bonds by two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial

court.

(d) The trial court is empowered to impose any or other conditions

in the Supurdaginama/indemnity bond and surety bonds to be

furnished by the petitioner and sureties, which it may deem fit.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Gourav/35

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)