[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramandeep Kaur vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:299) on 6 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:299]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8139/2025
Ramandeep Kaur W/o Gurdeep Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
Resident Of Village 34 Ksd Budhrawali District Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.R. Godara
For Respondent(s) : Mr. H.S. Jodha, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU
Order
06/01/2026
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 25.06.2025, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar in
Criminal Misc. Case No.53/2025 (CIS No.53/2025), filed
connection with FIR No.114/2025, P.S. Rajiasar, District Sri
Ganganagar and the vehicle Swift Dzire Car bearing registration
No.RJ-13-CE-7560 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
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 07:21:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:299] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8139/2025]
counsel therefore submits that the impugned order dated
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-13-CE- 7560, 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.
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 07:21:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:299] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8139/2025]
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.
(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J
197-Hanuman/-
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 07:21:16 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
