Dharam Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3627 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 3627 Raj
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Dharam Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 1 August, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:34068]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2472/2025

Dharam Singh S/o Sh. Gurudeep Singh Rai Sikh, Aged About 36
Years, Resdient Of Thedi Mohar Singh Ps Raniya District Sirsa
Haryana
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Learned Public Prosecutor
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Arjun Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

01/08/2025

1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under

Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for the following

reliefs:-

"It is, therefore, prayed that this criminal misc. petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases Bhilwara may kindly be quashed and set aside and the aforesaid Innova car HR 24 AC 9633 may kindly be ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner on supurdginama. ..."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal

Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 was

pleased to hold that the vehicle should not be permitted to remain

parked for a long period of time in the police station as the same

shall gather rust and shall not remain useful thereupon. Learned

counsel submitted that the impugned order dated 04.03.2025

[2025:RJ-JD:34068] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-2472/2025]

whereby the prayer for release of vehicle in favour of the

petitioner was refused, deserves to be set aside.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on

behalf of the petitioner for release of the vehicle.

4. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat

reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283, the present petition is allowed

and the learned trial Court is directed to release the vehicle

Innova Car bearing registration No.HR-24-AC-9633 which has

been seized as case property, by imposing the following

conditions:-

a) That the petitioner shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification;

b) That the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the trial court for proposed identification of the case property;

c) That the petitioner shall execute Supurdginama/indemnity bond and two sureties bond to the satisfaction of the trial court, and

d) The trial court is empowered to impose any other conditions in the Supurdginama/indemnity bond and surety bonds to be fulfilled by the petitioner, which it may deem fit.

5. Needless to say, the trial court shall first verify that the

petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question before

releasing the same.

6. Consequently, the present criminal misc. petition is allowed.

7. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 222-divya/-