Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1095 Raj
Judgement Date : 23 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:4439]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 90/2026
Raisudeen S/o Abdul Hamid, Aged About 30 Years, Udai Mandir
Asan, Near High Secondary School Jodhpur, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neha Kalla
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
23/01/2026
1. The instant criminal revision petition under Sections 438 and
442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been
preferred by the petitioner assailing the order dated 03.11.2025
passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Mobile
Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur in Criminal Misc. Case
No. 29/2025, whereby the learned Court below, while allowing the
application filed by the petitioner for release of the vehicle bearing
Registration No. RJ 22 RA 3380 along with trolly, imposed a
condition directing deposit of an amount of Rs.1,800/- towards
royalty/NGT fee.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and is entitled to
restoration of its possession. It is further contended that there is
no rival claimant to the vehicle and that if the vehicle is allowed to
(Uploaded on 27/01/2026 at 03:13:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4439] (2 of 3) [CRLR-90/2026]
remain stationed in the police premises, it would inevitably
deteriorate, resulting in avoidable loss to national property.
Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of
Gujarat, reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions
advanced on behalf of the petitioner.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
impugned order as well as the material placed on record.
5. This Court is of the view that upon a full-fledged inquiry, it is
finally determined that the vehicle was in fact used in violation of
mining laws and environmental norms, the imposition of any fine
or fee would amount to pre-judging an issue which is still sub
judice. In my opinion, determination of commission of any offence
or breach of law must precede the imposition of any penal liability.
In other words, a fine cannot be imposed without conclusion of
inquiry and recording of a finding of guilt.
6. In view of the settled legal position and being guided by the
principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), and further considering that
the condition imposed by the Court below requiring furnishing of a
bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- is harsh, onerous and
disproportionate, this Court is of the opinion that no useful
purpose would be served by insisting upon such a condition. The
same deserves to be interfered with in exercise of the inherent
jurisdiction of this Court.
(Uploaded on 27/01/2026 at 03:13:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4439] (3 of 3) [CRLR-90/2026]
7. Accordingly, the instant revision Petition is allowed. The
order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Civil
Judge and Judicial Mobile Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan,
Jodhpur is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent it imposes
the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- and
deposit of Rs.1,800/- towards royalty/NGT fee. The said conditions
are hereby waived.
8. The vehicle shall be released in favour of the petitioner upon
furnishing supurdginama and surety as otherwise directed by the
Court below.
9. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J 171-divya/-
(Uploaded on 27/01/2026 at 03:13:00 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!