Banshilal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8115 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:33212]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1310/2023

Banshilal S/o Bharmal, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Udaniyo Ki Dhani, Sanwarij Tehsil Phalodi, Dist. Jodhpur. Through Khas Mukhtyarnama Sohanlal S/o Banshilal, Age 37 Years, R/o Udaniyo Ki Dhani, Sanwrij, Police Station Phalodi, Dist. Jodhpur.

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


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. B.R. Godara
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Gaurav Singh, P.P.



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                     Order

06/10/2023

1. By way of filing the instant criminal revision petition

challenge is made to the order dated 11.09.2023 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Phalodi,

District Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.44/2023, whereby the

learned Judge though allowed the application filed by the

petitioner under Section 451 Cr.P.C. but an onerous condition has

been imposed to furnish bank guarantee of Rs.2,50,000/-.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The law in regard to deliver interim custody of the vehicle

pending trial has been enunciated by Hon'ble the Supreme Court

in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat,

reported in AIR 2003 SC 638 and whereafter in the judgment of

Sainaba Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr.

[2023:RJ-JD:33212] (2 of 2) [CRLR-1310/2023]

3. It is observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court that allowing the

vehicle to be parked or stationed in an open area in the police

Station, may get deterioration and can cause depletion of the

property which would be a loss to the national asset. Anywhere in

the above cited judgments, furnishing of bank guarantee has not

been made compulsory. The condition Nos.1 to 5 are absolutely in

consonance of the legal provision, but the condition No.6 of

furnishing bank guarantee, in my view is onerous and averse to

the interest of the petitioner because furnishing bank guarantee

would mean depositing Rs.2,50,000/- in the bank and then to get

the guarantee which is not purport of law.

4. Accordingly the revision petition is allowed. The Condition

No.6 of the order dated 11.09.2023 is waived and the vehicle shall

be handed over to the petitioner after complying condition Nos.1

to 5 of the aforesaid order.

5. The revision petition is allowed accordingly.

6. Stay petition stands disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 37-Taruna/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)