Manoj Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp
2022 Latest Caselaw 6367 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5843/2015

Manoj Kumar S/o Sh. Kali Charan, R/o Deendayal Park, Mawa
Wali Gali, Golden House, Baran
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp
2. Abdul Aziz S/o Ibrahim, R/o Chhipa Barod, PS Chhipa Barod,
Distt. Baran.
                                                                  ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. R.D.S. Naruka
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP
                                 Mr. Javed M. Khan for Mr. Ali Mohd.
                                 Khan

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

27/09/2022

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

praying that the order dated 2.3.2015 passed by Special Judge

N.D.P.S., Jaipur be set aside, whereby the said court refused to

release Truck bearing registration No.RJ-20G-1035 to the

petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that

petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle in question.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at Bar that

no confiscation proceedings are pending qua the vehicle and the

same is case property of case FIR No.24/2000 registered at Police

Station Chaksu, District Jaipur for the offence under Section 8/15,

8/16 & 8/17 of NDPS Act.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-5843/2015]

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.

Needless to say, trial court shall make verification that the

petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Brijesh 86.

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)