Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State vs Shankarlal on 17 June, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:26781]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2130/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Kesar Singh S/o Basant Singh, R/o Bichu Magri, Nathdwara,
District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2127/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Surendra Singh S/o Gamer Singh, R/o Village-Dagwada, Tehsil
Nathdwara, District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2128/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Bherulal S/o Kishor, R/o Bhurwada, Tehsil-Railmagra, District
Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2129/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Suresh S/o Hemraj, R/o Villae-Bandinal, Tehsil Nathdwara,
District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2131/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 10:05:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26781] (2 of 5) [CRLMP-2130/2021]
Ghanshyam S/o Ramlal, R/o Vyas Colony Mundol, District
Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2132/2021
State, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Vishnu Kanwar W/o Ranjit Singh Chauhan, R/o Village-Godwa,
P.s. Nathdwara, District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2133/2021
State, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Shankarlal S/o Tulsiram, R/o Bhurwada, Tehsil-Railmagra,
District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2134/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Bhagwanlal S/o Galaram, R/o Village-Khadri, Kiyawas, P.s.
Nathdwara, District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2135/2021
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
Versus
Kailash Kanwar D/o Shanker Singh, B/c Rajput, R/o Ulpura Nadi
Wala, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand (Raj.)
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2136/2021
State, Through Public Prosecutor
----Petitioner
(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 10:05:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26781] (3 of 5) [CRLMP-2130/2021]
Versus
Inder Singh S/o Kishor Singh, R/o Village-Saradi, Tehsil-
Salumber, District-Udaipur (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG
Mr. S.D. Chawariya
Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi AAG assisted by
Mr. Gaurav Bishnoi
Mr. Devendra Prajapat
Mr. Mahaveer Pareek
Mr. Lalit Pareek
Mr Harshvardhan
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
ORDER RESERVED ON ::: 28/03/2025
ORDER PRONOUNCED ON ::: 17/06/2025
BY THE COURT:-
1. These batch of Misc. Petitions have been filed by the State
of Rajasthan challenging the orders dated 15.07.2020,
04.09.2020, 29.07.2020, 14.08.2020, 05.09.2020 & 09.09.2020
passed in Criminal Appeal/ Criminal Revision Nos. 22/2020,
27/2020, 41/2020, 28/2020, 36/2020, 37/2020, 42/2020,
39/2020, 26/2020 & 41/2020 by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Nathdwara/Sessions Judge Rajsamand, whereby he
allowed the revision petitions moved on behalf of the vehicle
owners, directing release of the seized vehicles in their favour.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have
carefully perused the impugned orders as well as the material on
[2025:RJ-JD:26781] (4 of 5) [CRLMP-2130/2021]
record. The matter, though limited in scope, involves certain legal
niceties.
2.1. The vehicles belonging to the respondents-accused were
seized by the concerned police station on allegations of violating
penal provisions under the Mining Laws. It is well settled that an
application seeking release of a seized vehicle may be filed either
by the registered owner or by a person best entitled to possess
the vehicle. The legal position in this regard is no longer res
integra, in view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sundarbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of
Gujarat reported in AIR 2003 SC 638.
2.1. It is pertinent to note that such property, though movable in
nature, is still a national asset, and cannot be left to deteriorate in
the open parking areas of police stations for an indefinite period.
Proceedings under the Mines and Minerals (Development and
Regulation) Act can be duly undertaken in accordance with the
procedure established by law and rules framed thereunder.
2.2. The grant of interim custody of a vehicle to its registered
owner is a discretionary power vested in the criminal Courts under
Sections 451 to 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code. If any dues
or penalties are leviable against the respondents, the State
authorities are not precluded from initiating appropriate steps for
their recovery. Merely because proceedings are pending does not
necessitate continued detention of the vehicle in every case.
3. Upon careful consideration of the impugned orders of the
learned Magistrate, who had earlier dismissed the applications for
[2025:RJ-JD:26781] (5 of 5) [CRLMP-2130/2021]
release, it is evident that several procedural and substantive
deficiencies in the prosecution case were rightly noted done by it.
These findings, supported by cogent reasons, cannot be
overlooked.
3.1. The orders passed by the Court of Revision granting release
of vehicles does not disclose any perversity or manifest abuse of
the process of law that would warrant interference of this Court in
the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction.
3.2. Thus, I am, therefore, of the considered view that the Misc.
Petitions lack merit and deserve outright dismissal.
4. Accordingly, the instant Misc. petitions are dismissed. The
stay petitions, and all pending applications if any also stand
disposed of.
5. Let a copy of this order be placed in each connected file.
FARJAND ALI),J
11-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
