Allowed

Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Jan 2022CRLR/1023/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the condition to deposit a bank guarantee of Rs.8,00,000 imposed by the trial court in an NDPS case on the grounds that the petitioner was a poor person unable to meet the financial obligation. The miscellaneous petition regarding the release of the vehicle was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Condition to deposit bank guarantee of Rs. 8,00,000 imposed by trial court was quashed; petitioner not required to deposit it for vehicle release.

Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1023/2021

¶3

Ramlal S/o Shri Pancharam, Aged About 38 Years, B/c Bishnoi, R/o Ugras, Tehsil Phalodi, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	BR Godara
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Gaurav Singh,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶10

Judgment

¶11

21/01/2022

¶12

The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 24.9.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Pokaran whereby the learned Magistrate allowed the petitioner’s application filed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. and released the vehicle on ‘supardaginama’ and imposed a condition to deposit bank guarantee of Rs.8,00,000/-.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner made a limited prayer that the petitioner is a poor person and he is not in a position to deposit such huge Bank Guarantee as imposed by the trial court, therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition to deposit the bank guarantee may be quashed.

¶14

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a poor

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLR-1023/2021]

¶18

person, I deem it appropriate to quash the condition to deposit the bank guarantee as imposed by the trial court. Hence, the bank guarantee as imposed by the trial court is hereby quashed. The petitioner is not required to deposit the bank guarantee for releasing the offending vehicle.

¶19

The misc. petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶20

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶21

16-CPGoyal/-

Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Vs State of Rajasthan

Vachna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Chanda Kunwar Vs Ramsingh

Bhagirath Singh Vs Om Prakash

Shaitan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Manohar Singh Vs State