This order discharged an offending vehicle from police custody to prevent rust by requiring security and an undertaking against illegal use, quashing the lower court order.
The offending vehicle was ordered to be released to the registered owner upon purchase of security of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The lower order was quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3400/2020
Shankarlal S/o Prabhudayal, R/o Brahmano Ka Mohalla, Village Buj, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Upman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
23/11/2020
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vehicle, which is involved in the incident, deserve to be released as it would get rusted and spoiled, if it is remained in the police custody.
I have considered the submissions as above.
In the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Versus State of Gujarat : (2002) 10 SCC 283 , the Apex Court has made observations with regard to the conditions, which should be laid down for release of different goods/vehicles. It has also been observed that no purpose would be served in letting vehicle remained in the police custody as he get rusted and therefore, the conditions may be laid down for releasing of the same. This Court has also taken a similar view in a batch of Criminal Misc. Petitions lead case being S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 397/2020 : Julfi
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-3400/2020]
Singh Versus State of Rajasthan , along with other connected petitions.-
Keeping in view the above, this petition is allowed with the following terms:
a) The concerned Police Station shall release the offending vehicles – Tempo Trax bearing Registration No.RJ-25-TA0588 to the person, who is the registered owner of the said vehicles.
b) A personal security of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned Court to which the concerned Police Station is attached, shall be submitted by the petitioner for the purpose of release of the vehicles.
c) The petitioner shall furnish the photographs of the vehicles showing their numbers and colour etc.
d). At the time of release, the petitioner shall also give an undertaking to the effect that vehicle shall not be used for any illegal purpose and if so found, the concerned owner shall be personally liable.
The order passed by the Court below is accordingly quashed and set aside.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
SUNIL SOLANKI/268
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the vehicle involved in the incident should be released from police custody to prevent rust and spoilage.
Whether appropriate security conditions can be imposed for the release of the vehicle.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Versus State of GujaratReferred¶14
(2002) 10 SCC 283 · Who else cites this
Julfi Singh Versus State of RajasthanApplied¶14
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 397/2020
Shankarlal S/o Prabhudayal
State Of Rajasthan
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
