Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41394)
2025 Latest Caselaw 13256 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 13256 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41394) on 16 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:41394]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2466/2025
Ramesh Kumar S/o Bhakar Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Jambheshwar Nagar, Shivpuri Lohawat, Jodhpur, Through Power
Of Attorney Holder Bhakar Ram S/o Mangla Ram, Aged About 54
Years, R/o Paldiya Ki Dhani, Shivpuri, Jodhpur.
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                   ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Jogendra Singh
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Narendra Singh Chandawat, PP


          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

16/09/2025

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

Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and

setting aside the order dated 18.03.2025, passed by the learned

Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Bikaner (Additional Sessions

Judge No.1, Bikaner) in Criminal Misc. Case No.103/2025, filed

connection with FIR No.27/2025, P.S. Napasar, District Bikaner

and the vehicle SUV Hyundai bearing registration No.RJ-19-CL-

9666 may be released to the power of attorney holder on

superdari.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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 therefore submits that the impugned order dated

(Uploaded on 16/09/2025 at 08:27:10 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41394] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-2466/2025]

18.03.2025 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 SUV

Hyundai bearing registration No.RJ-19-CL-9666, which has been

seized as case property, to the power of attorney holder on

supurdginama by imposing the following conditions:-

a) That the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification;

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

c) That the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder 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 as well as power of attorney holder, which it may deem fit.

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

is power of attorney holder and 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.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J 177-Ramesh/-

(Uploaded on 16/09/2025 at 08:27:10 PM)