Allowed

Rajkumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2022CRR/64/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the High Court set aside an order rejecting the applicant's request for supurdnama of a motorcycle seized as contraband-carrier. The vehicle was released to the applicant who is also an accused, subject to a bond and strict undertakings against misuse or transfer.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; motorcycle released to applicant on bond of Rs.50,000 with surety and filing of undertakings.

Rajkumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRR No. 64 of 2021

¶5

Rajkumar Sahu S/o Mahadev Sahu, aged about 30 years, R/o. Village Ghoghra, Police Station and Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir – Champa, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, police of Police Station Urga, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Shri H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate. For Non-applicant/ State : Shri Kunal Das, P.L.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

15-09-2022

¶14

This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 17-8-2020 passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh in Special (NDPS) Case No. 10/2020 (State of Chhattisgarh versus Shanti Kumar Gabel and Anr.) by which the application under Section 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.') for handing over the motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 11 M 7302 (in short 'vehicle in question') to him on supurdnama has been rejected.

¶15

Brief facts of the case are that the applicant is the registered owner of vehicle in question. On 3-7-2020, police of Police Station Urga on receiving information that some persons are carrying Ganja in the vehicle in question for selling, proceeded towards Village Dhodhatarai and stopped the vehicle in question. During search of the said motorcycle, police seized total 6 kg 900 gm of Ganja from their possession. Offence under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (in brief 'NDPS Act') in Crime No. 206 of

¶16

-2-

¶17

2020 has been registered against the accused persons and the same is pending for consideration as Special (NDPS) Case No. 10/2020 (State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Shanti Kumar Gabel and Anr.) in the Court of Special Judge (NDPS Act), Korba.

¶18

The applicant filed an application for supurdnama under the provisions of Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. for custody of the vehicle in question on the ground that he is owner of the said vehicle, the said vehicle is kept in open place at police station and there is possibility that the vehicle may be damaged, as such, it be handed over to the applicant during pendency of the criminal case.

¶19

The Special Judge (NDPS Act), Korba by its impugned order dated 17-8-2020 rejected the said application on the ground that the applicant is also accused in the case and the said vehicle was being used for transportation of contraband article Ganja. Hence, this revision.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is the registered owner of the vehicle in question. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the vehicle in the custody, as if the vehicle is not in use, it is likely to be damaged, and, therefore, impugned order passed by the Special Judge be set aside and the vehicle in question may be given to him on supurdnama.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that 6 kg 900 gm of contraband has been seized from the vehicle in question, and if the vehicle is handed over to the applicant, there is possibility that it may again be used in transporting such contraband, therefore, the Special Judge has rightly rejected the application for supurdnama and the impugned order does not call for any interference by this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record and the impugned order.

¶23

-3-

¶24

According to the applicant, the vehicle in question is lying in police station in stationary condition for a long time. The applicant is the owner of the said vehicle. The motorcycle is a vehicle of daily use. If it is kept in such condition for a long time, its parts are likely to be ruined. Looking to the above facts and especially the quantity of seized contraband- Ganja i.e. 6 kg 900 gm, I feel inclined to allow this revision petition.

¶25

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17-8-2020 passed by learned Special Judge (NDPS), Korba, District Korba in Special (NDPS Act) Case No. 10 of 2020 is set aside. The revision petition is allowed and it is directed that vehicle in question be released and handed over to the applicant on the following conditions:-

¶26

‘(i) The applicant shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-with one solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Korba.

¶27

(ii) The applicant shall not transfer or dispose of the offending vehicle to any one else.

¶28

(iii) The applicant shall also file an undertaking before the trial Court that the offending vehicle shall not be used for commission of any offence;

¶29

(iv) Before giving custody of the offending vehicle to the applicant, three coloured photographs of cabinet from different angles clearly indicating registration number and other particulars of the vehicle shall be kept in file. The expenses for the photographs shall be borne by the applicant.

¶30

(v) The applicant shall produce vehicle either before trial Court or before such authorities as may be directed, on his own expenses, as and when directed.’

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

Nimmi

Rajkumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Lal Kenwat and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raja @ Shakti Mohammad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakhan Lal Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gautam Kurmi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Vs Purnima

Xyz (Minor) Vs State of Chhattisgarh