Allowed

Janu v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC6 Oct 2016CRLMP/4314/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC, setting aside orders rejecting a request for vehicle custody. The court directed the release of a seized tractor on 'supurdgi' upon furnishing security and undertaking to preserve the vehicle for trial in a case under the Rajasthan Forest Act.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; tractor with trolley to be delivered to petitioner on 'supurdgi' on furnishing security of Rs. 6,00,000 and an undertaking.

Janu Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

Crlmp4314/2016

¶2

// 1 //

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

ORDER

¶5

IN S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.4314/2016 (With Stay Application No.4446/2016)

¶6

Janu Son of Shri Hasan, aged about 32 years, by caste Mev, resident of village post Ladiyaki, Police Station Tapukara, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar ...accused-applicant-petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor ...respondent

¶9

Date of Order ::: 06.10.2016

¶10

Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

¶11

Mr. K.K. Chhawal, counsel for accused-applicantpetitioner Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, Public Prosecutor, for the respondent State

¶12

¶13

By the Court :-

¶14

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by petitioner – Janu Son of Shri Hasan, aggrieved by order dated 12.07.2016 of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Tijara, District Alwar, in Revision Petition No.37/2016, whereby he dismissed the revision petition and affirmed the order dated 03.12.2015 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tijara, District Alwar, in Criminal Case No.23/432/15, arising out of F.I.R. No.90/2015, Police Station Khushkheda, District Alwar, under Sections 41 and 42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 and Section 379 IPC. By order dated 03.12.2015, learned trial court rejected the application filed by accused-applicant-petitioner for releasing the vehicle

¶15

Crlmp4314/2016 // 2 //

¶16

bearing Registration No.RJ-02-R-8951, on 'supurdgi'.

¶17

Contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the aforesaid tractor with trolley was seized in connection with the offence under Sections 41 and 42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act and Section 379 of the IPC in the said FIR. After registration of the FIR, the procedure prescribed under Sections 52(2) and 52(4) of the Rajasthan Forest Act, was not put in motion. The police without there being any implication of provision of Section 52 of the Act, filed the charge-sheet in the matter. After filing of charge-sheet, petitioner moved an application for release of the vehicle on 'supurdgi', which came to be rejected vide order dated 03.12.2015.

¶18

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts, petitioner is entitled for the custody of the tractor with trolley. There is no other claimant. No useful purpose will be served in keeping the vehicle in police custody. It may deteriorate its condition, which will be a national wastage. There is no statutory bar on the release of the vehicle on 'supurdginama' during the trial.

¶19

Learned counsel for petitioner in support of his argument, placed reliance on the judgments of this Court in Arif Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan : 2004 WLC (Raj.) UC 540 & Nanda Vs. State of Rajasthan : 2004 WLC (Raj.) UC 608 .

¶20

Thus, considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for securing ends of justice.

¶21

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The

¶22

Crlmp4314/2016

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

impugned orders are set aside. It is directed that Tractor bearing registration No.RJ-02-R-8951 with trolley shall be delivered to the petitioner on 'supurdgi' on his furnishing “supurdginama” in the sum of Rs.6,00,000/- with two sureties in the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- each, undertaking to produce the vehicle in question before the concerned court as and when required and shall keep the condition of the vehicle intact and shall not transfer, mortgage or otherwise alienate the vehicle or damage it and change its shape in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner shall also furnish photographs of the Tractor with trolley showing its numbers, colour etc. It is made clear that in future if the vehicle is found to have been used in similar offence in future, the same would be liable to be confiscated.

¶25

This also disposes of stay application.

¶26

(Mohammad Rafiq) J.

¶27

//Jaiman//47

Janu v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janu v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State Home Departmentanr

Manish Sharma Vs Hansraj

Hemi Vs Raju

Tara Chand Gupta Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Banwari Lal Soni Vs Shri Shailendra Agarwal and Another