Allowed

Fakhruddin S/O Shri Salim v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC25 Apr 2023CRLMP/696/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan held that the Collector exceeded jurisdiction by imposing a fine under Section 6A of the Rajasthan Bovine Act. The order imposing the fine was quashed. The court allowed the petitioner's application for interim custody of the vehicle upon execution of a bank guarantee and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed. Interim custody granted to petitioner on execution of bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of like amount.

Fakhruddin S/O Shri Salim Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 696/2023

¶3

Fakhruddin S/o Shri Salim,R/o Village Jairoli, Tehsil Punhana District Nuh (Mewat) Haryana Vehicle Owner Mahindra Bolero Pickup Registries Number Hr-74-B8032.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arafat Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

25/04/2023

Heard the parties.

Vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No. HR-74-B8032, alongwith three other vehicles was seized by the police while the vehicles were carrying bovines. For the incident aforesaid, FIR No. 433/2022 was registered with Nagar police station District Bharatpur for offences punishable under Sections 5 and 8 of The Rajasthan Bovine Act.

¶14

The investigating officer of the case approached the Collector, Bharatpur to confiscate the seized vehicle in exercise of power under Section 6A of The Rajastshan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. The Collector issued notice to the petitioner and other vehicle owners and after hearing them, directed each of

¶15

[CRLMP-696/2023]

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

the vehicle owner to deposit Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three Lakh) as fine, failing which the vehicle would be seized.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Section 6A of the Act does not empower the Collector to impose fine, he has only jurisdiction to confiscate the vehicle after hearing the parties. The fine can be imposed only after conclusion of the trial if court thinks it proper to do so. Learned counsel further contends that the Collector was of the view that instead of confiscating the vehicle same may be released if the amount ordered is deposited by the owners.

¶19

Learned counsel for the State submits that in fact the word “fine” is in the nature of security for release of the vehicle. 5. In some other case Rashid Vs. State of Rajasthan no confiscation proceedings had started however the court below refused to give interim custody of the vehicle to its owner. Vide order dated 08.09.2022 this court in S.B. Cr.L.M.P. No. 664/2022 directed interim custody of the vehicle to the owner on production of bank guarantee of Rs. 3,00,000/-(three Lakh). The amount of bank guarantee was modified by Hon’ble Supreme Court and reduced to Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) in SLP Criminal No. 9311/2022. Accepting the same reasoning, it would be just and proper to give interim custody of the above referred vehicle to its registered owner on execution of bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lakh) alongwith two sureties of like amount.

¶20

Since the Collector has exceeded his jurisdiction by imposing fine therefore the order stands quashed and the instant petition stands allowed. Other condition of not transferring the

¶21

[CRLMP-696/2023]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

vehicle during pendency of the criminal case may be imposed by the court/authority concerned.

¶24

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

¶25

ashu /53

Fakhruddin S/O Shri Salim v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fakhruddin S/O Shri Salim 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

Indian Bank , Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramnaresh Tyagi S/O Devendra Tyagi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vimla Devi W/O Mr. Suresh Singh Bhadouriya, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sarmeena W/O Shahrukh D/O Alladin, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar Bairaigi Son of Late Shri Kalyan Das Bairagi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Kumar Sharma Son of Khem Chand Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan