Partly allowed

Ramdayal Ray v. State of Bihar through Principal Sectt. Prohibition Excise Registration Deptt., Patna

Patna HC16 Aug 2019CR. MISC./27591/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the modification of conditions for releasing a seized private vehicle. It substituted the requirement of furnishing a bank guarantee with the submission of an original immovable property title deed as security.

What did the court decide?

The condition of furnishing a bank guarantee in the order dated 24.07.2018 was modified to require the submission of the original title deed of immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Distri

Ramdayal Ray Vs State of Bihar through Principal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27591 of 2019

¶2

¶3

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1396 of 2018

¶4

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2018 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Vaishali

¶5

======================================================

¶6

RAMDAYAL RAY, Son of Mahesh Ray, Resident of Village - Lawapur Mahnar Ward No. 9, P.S.- Mahnar, Distt - Vaishali.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

¶10

The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

¶11

The Superintendent of Excise, Vaishali at Hajipur

¶12

The Excise Sub-Inspector, Task Force, Vaishali at Hajipur.

¶13

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶14

======================================================

¶15

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 16-08-2019

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶18

APP for the State.

¶19

Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking modification of the conditions imposed by this Court in its order dated 24.07.2018 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.1396 of 2018. By the said order, while granting provisional release of the vehicle in question, this Court had directed the petitioner to provide two sureties along with a bank guarantee for the value of the vehicle in question as indicated in the insurance document.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27591 of 2019(2) dt.16-08-2019 2/3

¶22

vehicle in question is a Maruti Suzuki Alto and it is a private vehicle of the petitioner which was being used for only family purposes, the vehicle was taken on loan from the private financer and he is unable to produce the bank guarantee because of the financial constraints but is willing to provide immovable property lying within the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate of sufficient value as security.

¶23

Learned counsel for the State is present and submits that the concern of the State is to protect its interest by directing the petitioner to provide adequate security.

¶24

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, finding that it is a Maruti Suzuki Alto 800 car which is in the nature of a smaller car normally meant for the family and the petitioner is ready to provide adequate security by way of deposit of title teed of the immovable property within the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, this Court directs that the condition of furnishing bank guarantee in its order dated 24.07.2018 stands substituted to the extent that in place of bank guarantee the petitioner shall furnish the original title deed of the immovable property in his name lying within the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur to secure interest of the State. The rest of the conditions shall

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27591 of 2019(2) dt.16-08-2019 3/3

¶26

remain intact. On the petitioner’s fulfilling the condition with the modification as above, the vehicle in question shall be released.

¶27

This modification application stands disposed off accordingly.

¶28

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶29

arvind/-

¶30

U T

Ramdayal Ray v. State of Bihar through Principal Sectt. Prohibition Excise Registration Deptt., Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdayal Ray v. State of Bihar through Principal Sectt. Prohibition Excise Registration Deptt., Patna

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

Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rana Uday Pratap Singh Vs Chief Regional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors.

Shree Tirupati Balaji Enterprizes Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Jalan Polytubes Private Limited and Anr. Vs the South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited and Ors.

Guddu Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar