Rajasthan High Court
Shivraj S/O Harisingh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:17379) on 15 April, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:17379]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2200/2024
Shivraj S/o Harisingh, R/o Umariya, Police Station
Harnavdashahji, District Baran (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Babulal Nasuna, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
15/04/2024
By way of filing of the instant miscellaneous petition,
challenge has been made to the order dated 06.03.2024 passed
by learned Special Judge NDPS Act, Chhabra, District Baran (Raj.)
in Supurdagi Application No.100/2024 (CIS No.100/2024) arising
out of FIR No.13/2024 registered at Police Station Harnavdashahji,
District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and
Section 8/29 of NDPS Act whereby the prayer made by the
petitioner for releasing the vehicle in question (motor-cycle)
bearing registration No. RJ28-SR-3068 on supurdagi has been
declined.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
is the registered owner of the vehicle in question which has been
seized by the Police Officers in connection with the aforesaid FIR.
He submits that the petitioner, being the registered owner of the
vehicle in question, is the person best entitled to get back the
[2024:RJ-JP:17379] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2200/2024]
possession of the seized property. It is also submitted that there is
no other person claiming supurdagi of the same. He further
submits that the vehicle in question is presently stationed unused
at the police station and soon it would become junk. He placed
reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, reported in
AIR 2003 SC 638.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the criminal
miscellaneous petition.
The purport of the case law cited by learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the power under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be
exercised expeditiously. The reason being that owner of the article
should not suffer because of it remaining unused and the police
should not be required to keep the article in safe custody. Apart
from this, these seized vehicles which in a wider sense, are
national property, would not be allowed to become junk day by
day. It has been further laid down in the aforecited case law that
while giving custody of the article, the article should be released
on proper security.
Furthermore, in the aforecited precedent law, the Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that the court should pass appropriate orders
immediately and the articles should not be kept for a long time at
the police station, and the procedure for disposal of the seized
valuable articles, currency notes, vehicles, seized liquor and
narcotic drugs has been laid down therein.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the parties and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforecited case
law, the present misc. petition is allowed. The impugned order
[2024:RJ-JP:17379] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2200/2024]
dated 06.03.2024 passed by learned Special Judge NDPS Act,
Chhabra, District Baran (Raj.) in Supurdagi Application
No.100/2024 (CIS No.100/2024) is quashed and set aside and the
learned court below is directed to release the vehicle in question
(motorcycle) bearing registration No. RJ28-SR-3068 to the
petitioner provided he furnishes a Supurdaginama of Rs.50,000/-
and surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The
petitioner shall furnish an undertaking to the court below that he
shall not sell, transfer or alienate the vehicle in question without
permission of the court and that he shall not use the vehicle for
any illegal and unlawful purpose in future.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
DEEPA RANI -60
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
