Partly allowed

Mohan Lal S/O Manphool v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Oct 2020CRLMP/2304/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to set aside an order imposing a condition to deposit compounding fees for releasing the petitioner's tractor and trolley, directing release on remaining trial court conditions.

What did the court decide?

Condition 1 of the impugned order set aside; Petitioner's tractor and trolley directed to be released on remaining conditions imposed by the Trial Court.

Mohan Lal S/O Manphool Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2304/2020

¶3

Mohan Lal S/o Manphool, R/o Village Khatumbar, Tehsil Lalsot, Distt. Dausa, Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

Mining Engineer Mining Departt. Sawaimadhopur.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore, through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Choudhary, PP for the State

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶11

Order

¶12

19/10/2020

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the aforesaid Cr. Misc. Petition under Section 482 CrPC for modifying the order dated 18.06.2020 passed by the Trial Court whereby the condition has been imposed with regard to deposition of compounding fee, royalty and other penalties for releasing the Tractor No. RJ 29 RA 9757 (Chassis No.MEA8D061JE1023371) and Trolley attached with the tractor of the petitioner.

¶14

At the out-set, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar controversy has been dealt with by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 3.2.2020 in S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 2723/2019 titled Asharam Versus State of Rajasthan and other connected matters, wherein the Court held

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMP-2304/2020]

¶17

that the compounding fee can only be charged, if it is adjudicated that the concerned vehicle was involved in the illegal activities, which can only be done when trial is completed. Accordingly, the impugned orders were quashed and set-aside and the aforesaid cr. misc. petition was allowed with certain directions. He further submits that the petitioner is in dire need of the aforesaid tractor and trolley for earning the livelihood and they have not been confiscated, hence they are required to be released on Supurdgi.

¶18

Learned PP appearing for the State is not in a position to deny the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter.

¶19

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Cr. Misc. Petition is allowed and condition no. 1 imposed by the trial court in its order dated 18.06.2020 is setaside and the Tractor and Trolley of the petitioner are directed to be released on rest of the conditions, as imposed by the Trial Court vide its order dated 18.06.2020.

¶20

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶21

Mohit/51/DK

Mohan Lal S/O Manphool v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Lal S/O Manphool v. State of Rajasthan

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

Indraj S/O Hanuman Vs State of Rajasthan

Roopsingh Lodha S/O Kanhiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Golu @ Pushpendra Lodha S/O Ramprasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Parshuram S/O Shri Hemram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Jawan S/O Shri Sheonarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dayashankar S/O Shri Sharvan Vs State of Rajasthan