Allowed

Sikander Beg v. State

Rajasthan HC2 Aug 2021CRLMP/1021/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a miscellaneous petition seeking release of a seized bus. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that the engine and chassis numbers were already verified by the FSL report and the ownership was undisputed. The Court directed the trial court to release the vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to release the seized bus to the petitioner on furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 5,00,000.

Sikander Beg Vs State — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

[CRLMP-1021/2021]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1021/2021

¶5

Sikander Beg S/o Mehboob Beg, Aged About 67 Years, Sipahiyo Ka Bada Bass Jaitaran, P.s. Jaitaran, District Pali, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

State, Through P.p.

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Mahaveer Singh
	Mr. Raghuveer Singh Bhati
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

02/08/2021

¶13

In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this misc. petition praying that the order dated 19.01.2021 passed by learned Additional Session Judge Jaitaran, District Pali, in connection with FIR No.187/2014 registered at Police Station Jaitaran be set aside, whereby the said Court upheld the order dated 22.10.2016 and refused to release the vehicle Bus bearing registration No.RJ-27-P-1672.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle in question and thus, the vehicle has to be released.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283 , to contend that the Supreme Court has held that the

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMP-1021/2021]

¶19

vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked in the police station as same shall gather rust and shall not remain useful.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor is not in a position to refute the

¶21

above position, but submits that in case, the vehicle is released, there will be a chance of engine number and chasis number having been tampered with / changed. He further submits that there shall be a danger of vehicle not being returned to the Court in the correct position.

¶22

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case, this Court finds that the facts regarding the engine number and chasis number have already been established by the FSL report and are on record. Further, the owner-ship of the vehicle is not disputed.

¶23

Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), the present petition is allowed and the trial court is directed to release the vehicle Bus bearing registration No.RJ-27-P-1672 on supardaginama in favour of petitioner on usual conditions, which the trial court deems fit, provided he furnishes a bank guarantee of Rs.5,00,000/- with the trial court. The disposal of the bank guarantee shall be in accordance with the final directions to be passed by the learned trial court after conclusion of the trial.

¶24

Needless to say, trial court shall make verification that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle.

¶25

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶26

60-Sudheer/-

Sikander Beg v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sikander Beg v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Ajadi Vs Custom and Central Excise Dept.

Prakash Vs State

Om Prakash Vs State

Manju Bochaliya Vs State of Rajasthan

Hastina Bai Vs State of Rajasthan

Heer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan