Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Khan Abdula Jaman vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:50099) on 19 November, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:50099]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 850/2025
Khan Abdula Jaman S/o Shri Shah Jaman Khan, Aged About 28
Years, Resident Of Sant Nagar Sultanpur Road O M Prakash
Timber Anshal Apl Ahmaoo Lucknow Up Through Its Power Of
Attorney Holder Shri Shah Jaman Khan S/o Shri Rustam Ali Aged
About 51 Years Resident Of Sant Nagar Saltanpur Road O.m.
Prakash Timber Anshal Api Ahmaoo Lukhnow Up ----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
19/11/2025
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 13.06.2025 passed by learned
Additional District & Session Judge, Bali, District Pali in Session
Case No.04/2024, whereby the learned trial Court rejected the
application under Section 457/451 Cr.P.C., moved by the petitioner
for releasing the Toyota Fortuner bearing registration
No.UP 32 HY 6000 (vehicle in question).
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 and the challan of
the case has already been presented. 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 Jaipur
Bench in Prakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in
2010 SCC OnLine Raj 992 wherein it was held that:
(Uploaded on 20/11/2025 at 05:03:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50099] (2 of 3) [CRLR-850/2025]
"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 03.04.2024 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:-
(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.
(Uploaded on 20/11/2025 at 05:03:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50099] (3 of 3) [CRLR-850/2025]
(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.
(f) the trial court is empowered to impose any other
conditions which is to be fulfilled by the petitioner,
that it may deem fit.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
308-mSingh/-
(Uploaded on 20/11/2025 at 05:03:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
