Allowed

Samim v. State

Rajasthan HC20 Oct 2021CRLMP/904/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of High Court of Rajasthan allowed criminal miscellaneous petition to quash order rejecting application for conditional release of seized vehicle. Court directed release of truck PB-10-FV-1117 on 'supurdagi' subject to furnishing personal bond, sureties, photographs, and undertakings against transfer, use in antisocial activities, or identity alteration.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of 27.01.2021 was quashed; vehicle Truck PB-10-FV-1117 released on 'supurdagi' subject to personal bond, sureties, photographs, and specific undertakings regarding ownership, leasin

Samim Vs State — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 904/2021

¶3

Samim S/o Sh. Habib Ali, Aged About 35 Years, B/c Musalman, R/o H.no. 313/27/743 Gali No. 19 Ambedkar Lohra District Ludhiyana Punjab Through Power Of Attorney Holder Firoj Ali S/o Sh. Ramjan Mohmad, Musalman, R/o Saroj Thana Akberpur Sena, Tehsil Maler Kotla, District Sangrur (Punjab).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus State, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain Mr. Pravin Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶7

Order

¶8

20/10/2021

¶9

Petitioner through Power of Attorney Holder has filed this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to assail the impugned judgment dated 27.01.2021 passed by Learned Additional Session Judge, Gulabpura, District Bhilwara (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) whereby the learned trial Court rejected the application under Sections 451, 457 Cr.P.C., moved by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle Truck No. PB-10-FV-1117 on ‘supurdagi’.

¶10

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his arguments, has placed reliance on a decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered at Jaipur Bench in Prakash Chand Vs.

¶12

(2 of 3)

¶13

[CRLMP-904/2021]

¶14

State of Rajasthan reported in 2010(1) Cr.L.R.(Raj.) 507. In the aforesaid judgment, the vehicle and other articles were seized from the accused for carrying contraband of small quantity just above the commercial quantity. It is in that background, the Court has acceded to the prayer of the incumbent and recorded its finding that solely for the reason that the vehicle and other articles are likely to be confiscated after trial, conditional release of the vehicle and other articles on Supurdginama and surety cannot be denied and interim custody of the vehicle and other articles can be granted to the incumbent on certain conditions. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 and coordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench in case of Prakash Chand (supra) has held that conditional release of the vehicle cannot be denied.

¶15

Accordingly, the instant misc. petition is allowed and the order dated 27.01.2021 is hereby quashed and set aside and the vehicle Truck No. PB-10-FV-1117 in question is ordered to be released on ‘supardagi’ till the completion of the trial upon following conditions:-

¶16

(a) the petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.6,00,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.3,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court undertaking to produce the vehicle Truck bearing No. PB-10-FV-1117 in the Court as and when required to do so.

¶17

(b) the petitioner shall get the vehicle Truck photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the case.

¶18

(c) the personal bonds of the petitioner and bonds of sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and his sureties and the bond of sureties shall further carry the photograph of perhaps identifying them before

¶19

(3 of 3)

¶20

[CRLMP-904/2021]

¶21

the Court which is with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

¶22

(d) the petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle Truck and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

¶23

(e) the petitioner will not allow the vehicle Truck bearing No. PB-10-FV-1117 to be used for any antisocial activities including for the purpose of carrying narcotics which may constitute offence under the NDPS Act.”

¶24

(f) the petitioner will be given the custody of the vehicle No. PB-10-FV-1117, if he furnishes a bank guarantee of Rs. 7,00,000/- before the trial court for the release of the vehicle through Power of Attorney.

¶25

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶26

10-payal/-

Samim v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samim 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Surpat Singh Rajvi Vs Rajmaata Baghelijee Sudharshna Kumar Ji Trust

M/S. Markap Resources Pvt. Ltd. Vs Raj. State Industrial Deve. and Investment Cor. Ltd.

Jitendra Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Punja Ram Vs Vivek Singh and Anr.

Mahesh Kumar Vs Sh. Shiv Kumar