Mangilal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:53753)
2025 Latest Caselaw 16848 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 16848 Raj
Judgement Date : 11 December, 2025

[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mangilal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:53753) on 11 December, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:53753]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
            S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1500/2025

Mangilal S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of
Jaisinghdesar Magra, Tehisl Nokha, District Bikaner.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor.
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Aman Bishnoi,
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Sonu Manawat, PP



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

11/12/2025

The petitioner has filed this criminal revision petition under

Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. (Section 438/442 BNSS) to assail the

impugned judgment dated 03.10.2025 passed by learned Upper

Session Judge No. 1, Bikaner, in Criminal Case No.426/2025,

whereby the learned trial Court rejected the application under

Section 457 Cr.P.C./503 of BNSS, moved by the petitioner for

releasing the Bolero Camper bearing registration No.RJ-36-GA-

1947.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Public Prosecutor.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is a registered owner of the vehicle in question. Learned counsel

for the petitioner, in support of his arguments, has placed reliance

on a decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered at

(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 03:30:29 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53753] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1500/2025]

Jaipur Bench in Prakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan

reported in 2010 SCC OnLine Raj 992 wherein it was held that:

"It is not in dispute that motor vehicle involved in the present matter is registered for commercial use and the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and thereby, no other person has claimed rights over the vehicle. Only for the reason that vehicle is liable to be confiscated after trial, "Supurdagi" of the vehicle cannot be denied. It is only an interim custody, which is given to the party on certain conditions."

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal

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

held that conditional release of the vehicle cannot be denied.

Furthermore, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Bishwajit Dey Vs. State of Assam reported in 2025 3 SCC

241 has observed that :-

"27. Though the risk of misuse by the accused or third party of the same plane or bus or ship cannot be ruled out, yet the Courts do not take coercive action on the basis of fear or suspicion or hypothetical situation.

28. Undoubtedly, the Vehicle is a critical piece of material evidence that may be required for inspection to substantiate the prosecution's case, yet the said requirement can be met by stipulating conditions while releasing the Vehicle in interim on superdari like videography and still photographs to be authenticated by the Investigating Officer, owner of the Vehicle and accused by signing the said inventory as well as restriction on sale/transfer of the Vehicle."

Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed and the

order dated 03.10.2025 is hereby quashed and set aside and the

vehicle in question is ordered to be released on 'supardgi' till the

completion of the trial upon following conditions:-

(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 03:30:29 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53753] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1500/2025]

(a) That the petitioner shall execute Supurdginama/ indemnity bond and two sureties bond to the satisfaction of the trial court along with an undertaking to produce the vehicle in question in the Court as and when required to do so.

(b) the petitioner shall get the vehicle in question, photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept in the file of the case.

(c) the personal bonds of the petitioner and bonds of sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and his sureties and the bond of sureties shall further carry the photograph of persons perhaps identifying them before the Court which is with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

(d) the petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in question and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

(e) the petitioner shall not allow the vehicle in question to be used for any antisocial activities including for the purpose of carrying narcotics which may constitute offence under the NDPS Act.