Smt. Ranjana Jain W/O Shri Vikas ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2434 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2928/2019

Smt. Ranjana Jain W/o Shri Vikas Jain, Proprietor M/s B.r.
International, Plot No. 120, Vasundhara Colony, Tonk Road,
Jaipur- 302018, Rajasthan.
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor, Jaipur
        City, Jaipur.
2.      S.n. Kapoor Export, Through Its Manager Renji George,
        Khawasji Ka Bagh, Amer Road, Brahampuri Jaipur North
        (Raj)
                                                                     ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vimal Chand Chaudhary, Adv. with Mr. Yogesh Tailor, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

21/03/2022

Application (I.A. No.01/2022) for early listing is allowed.

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

against the order dated 13.08.2018 passed by learned Additional

District & Sessions Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan whereby

rejected the revision petition No.14/18 titled as Smt. Ranjana Jain

Vs. State which arose against the order dated 14.12.2017 passed

by Metropolitan Magistrate No.22, Jaipur Metropolitan who

rejected the petitioner's application for releasing the carpet and

map in FIR No.19/2017 dated 05.01.2017 registered at Police

Station Brahmpuri in FR No.142/2017 registered No.176/2017,

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-2928/2019]

whereby the said courts refused to release the carpet to the

petitioner on Supurdgi.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner is owner of the carpet in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

presently carpet in question are lying in Police Station and

condition of the carpet be damaged day by day. No purpose will be

fulfilled to keep the carpet in police station. Whenever court's

order to produce the carpet, he would produce the carpet before

the Court, So, the carpet in question be released on supurdagi.

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 carpet seized

as case property by imposing following conditions:-

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

shall not change their identification.

b) That the petitioner shall produce the carpet 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.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-2928/2019]

(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.

Stay application also stands disposed of.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin /19

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)