Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kalyan Gadri vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 September, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1075/2022
Kalyan Gadri S/o Shri Unkar Gadri, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Gadari Kheda, Gram Panchayat Aasopa, P.s. Paroli, Dist. Bhilwara
(Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaipal Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
08/09/2022
The petitioners have preferred this revision petition praying
that the order dated 06.08.2022 passed by learned Special Judge,
NDPS Act Cases, Bhilwara in Criminal Misc. Case No. 59/2022 be
set aside, whereby the said Court refused to release the
ornaments and Aadhar Card of the petitioner.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has stated at Bar that
no confiscation proceedings are pending qua the articles in
question and the same is case property. The learned counsel for
the petitioners has relied upon Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs.
State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, to contend that the
Supreme court has held that the article should not be permitted to
remain in the police station as same shall not remain useful. The
Hon'ble Apex Court in Sunderbhai (Supra) has held as under:-
"15. Learned senior counsel Mr. Dholakia, appearing for the State of
Gujarat further submitted that at present in the police station
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 09:19:24 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-1075/2022]
premises, number of vehicles are kept unattended and vehicles
become junk day by day. It is his contention that appropriate
directions should be given to the Magistrate who are dealing with
such questions to hand over such vehicles to its owner or to the
person from whom the said vehicles are seized by taking appropriate
bond and the guarantee for the return of the said vehicles if required
by the Court at any point of time.
16. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submitted that this question of handing over vehicles to the person
from whom it is seized or to its true owner is always a matter of
litigation and a lot of arguments are advanced by the concerned
persons.
17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such
seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the
Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking
appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the
said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done
pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles.
18. In case where the vehicle is not claimed by the accused, owner,
or the insurance company or by third person, then such vehicle may
be ordered to be auctioned by the Court. If the said vehicle is insured
with the insurance company then insurance company be informed by
the Court to take possession of the vehicle which is not claimed by
the owner or a third person. If Insurance company fails to take
possession the vehicles may be sold as per the direction of the
Court. The Court would pass such order within a period of six
months from the date of production of the said vehicle before the
Court. In any case, before handing over possession of such vehicles,
appropriate photographs of the said vehicle should be taken and
detailed panchnama should be prepared."
Learned Public Prosecutor is not in a position to refute the
above position.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record
of the case.
Thus, relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra) and orders passed
by this Court in Pannaram Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal
Revision Petition No.439/2020) decided on 29.06.2020 and Amra
Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc.(Pet.) No.1657/2020)
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 09:19:24 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-1075/2022]
decided on 04.09.2020, the present revision petition is allowed
and the trial court is directed to release the daily wear ornaments
and Aadhar Card of the petitioner on supardaginama on usual
conditions, which the trial court deems fit.
Needless to say, trial court shall make verification that the
petitioners are the owner of the article in question.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
225-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
