Vakil Ahamad vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:2124)
2026 Latest Caselaw 511 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 511 Raj
Judgement Date : 14 January, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vakil Ahamad vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:2124) on 14 January, 2026

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2026:RJ-JD:2124]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 198/2026

Vakil Ahamad S/o Sikandar Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Masjid Ke Pas Dhaniya Jod Ps Bap District Phalodi.
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)            :     Bhanwaru Ram Godara
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

14/01/2026

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

Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for the following

reliefs:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Misc. petition may kindly be allowed and impugned order dated 08-12-2025 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Special judge N.D.P.S. CASES Phalodi may kindly be quashed and set aside and Vehicle Car Swift being Registration No.RJ-04 CA 3367 may kindly be ordered to be released to the petitioner on superdgi Nama."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted 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 submitted that the impugned order dated 08.12.2025

(Uploaded on 14/01/2026 at 05:25:22 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:2124] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-198/2026]

whereby the prayer for release of vehicle (Swift car) 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 (Swift

car) bearing registration No. RJ-04-CA-3367 which has been

seized as case property, by imposing the following conditions:-

a) That the petitioner shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification;

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

c) That the petitioner 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, which it may deem fit.

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

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 42-himanshu/-

(Uploaded on 14/01/2026 at 05:25:22 PM)