Ramlal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9076 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:37903]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1448/2023

Ramlal S/o Kishnaram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Nedinadi, P.s. Dhorimana, Dist. Barmer, Raj.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Kumar Khilery For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anish Bhurat, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

04/11/2023

1. By way of filing the instant criminal revision petition,

challenge is made to the order dated 27.09.2023 passed by the

learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, (ADJ No.1) Barmer in

Criminal Misc. Case No.89/2023 arising out of the FIR No.49/2022

registered at the Police Station Dhorimana, District Barmer under

the provisions of Sections 8/15, 18, 21 & 30 of the NDPS Act,

Sections 353, 307 of the IPC, Section 3 of the PDPP Act and

Section 3/25 of the Indian Arms Act whereby the learned Judge

has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for releasing the articles/

ornaments/currency notes in his favour.

2. Briefly stated the facts in short are that on 04.02.2022,

police team of Police Station Dhorimana, District Barmer made a

trap to apprehend the petitioner Ramlal and in that course, efforts

were made to intercept the vehicle which was allegedly being

[2023:RJ-JD:37903] (2 of 5) [CRLR-1448/2023]

driven by the petitioner Ramlal. He was apprehended at the spot

for the allegations of causing damage to public property, making

attempt to kill police party and having illegal arms in his

possession, besides the offence under the NPDS Act, certain

quantity of opium and other narcotic substance was recovered

from his conscious possession. At the time of search and seizure

of the contraband and vehicle, the petitioner was wearing some

gold ornaments like chain, rings etc. and was having currency

notes of Rs.1,03,000/- with him. The ornaments and rupees were

seized by the police. After investigation, the charge sheet has

been filed against the petitioner for committing offence and illegal

transportation of the narcotic drugs, preventing and deterring the

public servants from discharging their official duty and making an

attempt to kill them, damaging public property and under the

Arms Act for having illegal arms with him. It is to be noted that no

offence of theft, robbery/dacoity or any offence of monetary

transaction or offence of taxation or income tax has been charged

against him. It is not the case of the prosecution that the

petitioner was illegally holding the ornaments and the currency

notes were either counter fit or was a crime proceed. The

ornaments and rupees were seized on personal search made upon

the petitioner and no nexus of the same has been shown with the

alleged crime for which he has been chargesheeted.

3. An application was moved on behalf of the petitioner before

the learned trial Court for releasing the seized ornaments and

currency notes which came to be dismissed by the learned Court

below vide order under assail dated 27.09.2023.

[2023:RJ-JD:37903] (3 of 5) [CRLR-1448/2023]

4. I have heard learned counsel Shri Ashok Khilery,

representing the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor

and have gone through the entire material as made available on

record.

5.    It      is     an       admitted            fact       situation       that      the

articles/ornaments/currency               notes      for    which     the    prayer     for

releasing     them has been made, has no nexus with the alleged

crime for which the petitioner has been chargesheeted.                              These

articles/ornaments/currency notes have been seized only on the

count that when the personal search upon the petitioner was

made before his arrest, he was wearing the same. There is no

iota of evidence or any whisper by the prosecution regarding any

nexus of the articles under question with the offences charged. It

is not the case of the prosecution that these

articles/ornaments/currency notes shall be subject to identification

during trial. It is also not the case of the prosecution that the

said things would be taken as a piece of evidence against the

petitioner in respect of the offence for which he chargesheeted.

Suffice it would be to say that the articles/ornaments/currency

notes for which the prayer has been made has no direct or

indirect nexus with the alleged crime.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor has candidly admitted that neither

the prosecution believes that the seized articles/ornaments does

not belong to the petitioner nor the same is disproportionate to

his assest.

7. No objection from taxation department or income tax

department has been raised in this regard. Simply, it can be said

[2023:RJ-JD:37903] (4 of 5) [CRLR-1448/2023]

that these articles/ornaments/currency notes are lying in the

Malkana of the Police Station concerned for no reason. The

petitioner is the actual owner of the property in question as he

claims and ofcourse, there is no claim of any other person over

the same. These things were taken from him during search and

seizure, therefore, in my view, the petitioner is the person best

entitled to get back its possession.

8. While dealing with an application under Sections 451 or 457

of the Cr.P.C., the Court of law is required to ascertain the fact that

who is the person best entitle to get back the possession of the

property in question during trial. The natural decay and

deterioration of the property in the police Malkhana cannot be

ruled out. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai

Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283 has

propounded the theory in this regard. In a recent judgment order

dated 18.11.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Criminal Appeal No. 2005/2022 [SLP (Crl.) No.7280/2022) titled

as Sainaba Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr., wherein, the

vehicle involved in a crime under NDPS Act was directed to be

released on terms and conditions to be determined by the Special

Court as an interim custody.

9. As an upshot of the discussion made herein above, this Court

is of the firm view that the prosecution has miserably failed to

establish any connection of the above mentioned seized

articles/ornaments/currency notes with the alleged crime and as

the same belongs to the petitioner, therefore, he is the person

best entitle to get back the possession of it.

[2023:RJ-JD:37903] (5 of 5) [CRLR-1448/2023]

10. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision Petition is allowed.

The order dated 27.09.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside and

the trial court is directed to release the articles/ornaments

(description of which is mentioned in the application under

Sections 451 & 457 Cr.P.C.) along with currency notes in favour of

the petitioner on interim custody till conclusion of the trial

provided he furnishes a on supardaginama of Rs.2,00,000/- and

surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Court below.

(FARJAND ALI),J 22-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)