Rajasthan High Court
Mukesh Nath Son Of Bheeknath vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:7921) on 15 February, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:7921]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7228/2023
Mukesh Nath Son Of Bheeknath, Aged About 28 Years, Resident
Of Luharon Ka Mohalla, Medta, District Nagaur (Raj).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Jakhar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Mahala, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
15/02/2024
By way of instant miscellaneous petition under Section 482
Cr.P.C., challenge has been made to the order dated 09.10.2023
passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan (Raj.)
in Criminal Misc. Application No.446/2023 arising out of FIR
No.991/2023 registered at PS Mansarovar, District Jaipur City
(South) for offence under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act whereby
the prayer made by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle in
question bearing registration No. RJ19-UA-9699 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.
Counsel submits that the petitioner being the registered owner of
the vehicle in question, is the person best entitled to get back the
possession of the seized property. It is also submitted that there is
[2024:RJ-JP:7921] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7228/2023]
no other person claiming supurdagi of the same. He contends that
the learned trial court rejected the application of the petitioner on
the ground that the seized vehicle is liable to be confiscated in
view of Section 60(3) of the NDPS Act. However, that cannot be a
sole ground to deny custody to the petitioner. He submits that the
vehicle in question is presently stationed unused at the police
station and soon it would become junk. He places 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, the 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.
[2024:RJ-JP:7921] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7228/2023]
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
dated 09.10.2023 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S Cases, Jaipur
Metropolitan (Raj.), in Criminal Misc. Application No.446/2023 is
quashed and set aside and the learned court below is directed to
release the vehicle in question bearing registration No.RJ19-UA-
9699 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 produce the same
before the court below as and when called upon to do so. It is also
made clear that he shall not use the vehicle for any illegal and
unlawful purpose in future.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
GAUTAM JAIN /125
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
