Dismissed

Neetu Gurjar S/O Shri Ganesh Narayan B/C Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Jul 2022CRLMP/1616/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Special Bail Criminal Miscellaneous Petition challenged orders dismissing an application for the release of a vehicle gifted to the petitioner. The High Court upheld the lower courts' rejection of the claim, noting the vehicle had been given on 'Supurdginama' to the respondent, aligning with recent coordinate judgments.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; impugned orders upheld; application for releasing the vehicle not allowed.

Neetu Gurjar S/O Shri Ganesh Narayan B/C Gurjar Vs… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1616/2019

¶3

Neetu Gurjar W/o Shri Ganesh Narayan, aged about 25 Years, R/o Bavdi Ka Bag, Bagreton Ka Mohalla, Sanganer, Jaipur, Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor

¶7

Ganesh Narayan Gurjar S/o Shri Ram Kishore Gurjar, aged about 25 Years, R/o 63, Printers New Sitabari, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Raj. - ---respondents

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shruti Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashwant Kankhedia, P.P. Mr. Om Prakash Pareek, Advocate

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶10

Order

¶11

12/07/2022

¶12

Instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated 18.07.2017 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.16, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, in Criminal Revision No.258/2017, titled as Neetu Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Another , whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the order dated 24.12.2016 passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge– cum-Metropolitan Magistrate No.15, Jaipur Metropolitan, Japur, in Case No.69/2018, whereby, application for releasing the vehicle filed by the petitioner had been rejected, was upheld.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the impugned orders dated 24.12.2016 & 18.07.2017 passed by learned Courts below are contrary to law. It is further

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMP-1616/2019]

¶16

submitted that the vehicle-in-question was purchased on 27.04.2013 by the father of the petitioner for which payment was made on 26.04.2013 for gifting it to her on the day of ‘Lagan-teeka’ ceremony and the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent No.2 was solemnized on 12.05.2013. It is also submitted that neither bank statement nor any explanation has been given by respondent for purchasing the vehicle-in-question and the learned Courts below have not considered that the vehicle-in-question is an absolute property of the petitioner, as provided under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Lastly, it is prayed that the present petition may be allowed, the impugned orders dated 18.07.2017 & 24.12.2016 be quashed & set aside and the application for releasing the vehicle filed by the petitioner be also allowed.

¶17

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner, has placed reliance upon judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Mangal Singh Khinchi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [2012 (4) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1895].

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, have strongly opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶19

During the course of arguments, while opposing, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, has also placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the different Co-ordinate Bench of this Court one in the case of Rukki Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No.2867/2018) decided on 10.01.2020 and another in the case of Hoshiyar Singh Vs. Anita and Others, S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.765/2016 decided on 12.05.2016.

¶20

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material made available on record.

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLMP-1616/2019]

¶23

From bare perusal of impugned order dated 24.12.2016 passed by learned trial Court, it reveals that the alleged vehicle bearing registration No.RJ-14-CT-1418 was given on ‘ Supurdginama ’ to respondent No.2 - Ganesh Narayan Gurjar @ Bablu, being a registered owner of the vehicle and the receipt thereof was also in his name. The said order was affirmed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.16, Jaipur Metropolitan, vide its order dated 18.07.2017, passed in Criminal Revision No.258/2017.

¶24

It transpires from the judgments cited herein-above by learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 that in identical cases, the vehicle-in-question has been given on ‘ supurdginama’ to registered owner of the alleged vehicle. Furthermore, the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, pertains to year, 2012, whereas the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, pertain to year, 2016 and 2020 respectively.

¶25

This Court concurs the view taken in the impugned orders dated 24.12.2016 & 18.07.2017 passed by the learned Courts below as the orders are well-reasoned.

¶26

In view of the above discussion, the present petition has no force and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶27

Miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶28

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J.

¶29

Ashish-Ashok/69

Neetu Gurjar S/O Shri Ganesh Narayan B/C Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neetu Gurjar S/O Shri Ganesh Narayan B/C Gurjar 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

Junun Ali and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Salim Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Pankaj Vijay Vs Lavlit Kumar Patni and Anr.

Prakash @ Om Prakash S/O Madan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shripal Dabriya S/O Shri Prabhudayal Dabariya Vs State of Rajasthan

Sukhdev Son of Shri Naraian Vs State of Rajasthan