Allowed

Surajbhan Kumawat S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Kumawat, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Dec 2024/7592/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's application to release a seized vehicle. Relying on the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai, the court held that since no confiscation order was passed, the vehicle should be returned to the registered owner on bond, subject to specific conditions including preventing transfer and ensuring identification.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order quashed; vehicle released on bond requiring security of Rs. 5 lakhs, pillaging prevention, and vehicle photography.

Surajbhan Kumawat S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Kumawat, Vs… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:50499]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7592/2024 Surajbhan Kumawat S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Kumawat, R/o Near By Jain Farm Dehara, Gedaro Ki Dhani, Boraj, Dudu, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anoop Pareek & Mr.Vinod Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vijay Singh Yadav, PP

¶9

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order

¶10

09/12/2024

¶11

Learned counsels for the petitioner submits that vehicle, (Maruti Baleno) bearing Registration No.RJ47-CA-7169 was seized by the Police in connection with the F.I.R. No.490/2024, registered at the Police Station Pratap Nagar, Jaipur for the offence under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Section 3/25 of Arms Act & Section 3 P.D.P.P. Act.

¶12

Counsels submits that till date, no order of confiscation under Section 60 of N.D.P.S. Act has been passed and the SHO Police Station Pratap Nagar (East) vide its letter dated 17.11.2024 has asked the petitioner to do the needful exercise for release of the vehicle in question, otherwise, the same would be auctioned as per the law.

¶13

Counsel submits that the petitioner submitted an application under Section 457/451 Cr.P.C. for releasing the aforesaid vehicle in question on supurdgi, however, the same has been rejected by the learned Court below on the ground that no satisfactory

[2024:RJ-JP:50499]

[CRLMP-7592/2024]

(2 of 3)

investigation has been done by the investigating agency with regard to the ownership of the vehicle in question.

¶18

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle and there is no other impediment for its release, therefore, he is entitled to get supurdgi of the same.

¶19

In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat , reported in (2002)10 SCC 290.

¶20

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that the vehicle in question was used by the petitioner for the purpose of the commission of offence punishable under N.D.P.S. Act and it can be a subject matter of confiscation under Section 60 of the N.D.P.S. Act, hence, the petitioner is not entitled for release of the said vehicle in his favour.

¶21

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶22

It is undisputed fact that the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle in question and the same has not been claimed by any other person. Now, it is no more res integra that the seized vehicle under the provisions of the N.D.P.S Act, can be released in the favour of its registered owner; though, he may be an accused, if no order of confiscation has been passed.

¶23

Under these circumstances, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed. The impugned order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the Special Judge N.D.P.S. Cases Jaipur, Metropolitan-I is quashed and set aside. It is directed that the vehicle, (Maruti

[2024:RJ-JP:50499]

[CRLMP-7592/2024]

(3 of 3)

Baleno) bearing Registration No. RJ 47-CA-7169 be released in favour of the petitioner on ‘ supurdginama ’ on producing original registration certificate and on satisfying the following conditions:-

¶28

(1) He furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.2,50,000/each to the satisfaction of the trial Court undertaking to produce the vehicle in question in the Court as and when required to do so.

¶29

(2) He shall get the vehicle in question 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.

¶30

(3) The personal bonds of the petitioner and bonds of sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and her sureties and the bond of sureties shall further carry the photographs of persons identifying them before the Court with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

¶31

(4) The petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in question and not to lease it to any one and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

¶32

(5) The petitioner is restraint to sell and innate the vehicle in question and he will submit an undertaking before the trial Court, in case, any order of confiscation under Section 60 of the N.D.P.S. is passed against him, he will deposit the vehicle before the trial Court.

¶33

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶34

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶35

Aayush Sharma /244

Surajbhan Kumawat S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Kumawat, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surajbhan Kumawat S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Kumawat, 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

Satish @ Satya Narayan Son of Shri Devpal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramraj Son of Shri Gopal Jat, Vs State of Rajasthan

Siddharth Singh S/O Shri Digvijay Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilip Srivastava S/O Shri Radha Govind Srivastava Vs State of Rajasthan

Rishi Raj Meena @ Rishi @ Peshkar @ Manoj Son of Ramphal Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkesh Meena S/O Shri Battu Lal Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan