Allowed

Jarneilsingh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Mar 2024CRLMA/77/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed an application for the release of a seized car, Aadhar card, and purchase documents in the appellant's possession on interim custody pending an appeal, requiring the value of Rs. 3,00,000 as security and an undertaking against disposal.

What did the court decide?

Release of vehicle and documents in favour of the appellant on interim custody upon payment of security and execution of undertaking.

Jarneilsingh Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:11249]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. II Appli No. 77/2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.822/2018

¶6

Jarnail Singh S/o Sulakhan Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Sodhi Nagar, P.S. - Ghal Khurd, Dist. Firozpur (Punjab)

¶7

----Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Ranjeet Singh Gill.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan,P.P.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶13

Order

¶14

06/03/2024

¶15

By way of this second criminal misc. application, the applicant-appellant prayed for releasing the vehicle- Hyundai Creta CRDI SX 1.6C Car, having Chassis No.MALC381ULFM022273 and Engine No.D4FBFM392703 along with one Samsung Mobile with SIM NO.9465509959, Aadhar Card and other documents regarding car purchase and insurance in favour of the appellant-applicant.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant and learned Public Prosecutor.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that apart from the applicant-appellant, no other person is claiming ownership over the seized vehicle and therefore, the applicant-appellant is best person entitled to get the possession of the seized properties.

[2024:RJ-JD:11249]

[CRLMA-77/2024]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel submitted that since, it is not in dispute before the Court that the applicant-appellant is the owner of the vehicle in question, therefore, he may be handed over possession of the same on Supurdaginama .

¶22

In support of his contention, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgments rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 and Sainaba vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.2005/2022), decided on 18.11.2022 wherein, the vehicle involved in a crime under the NDPS Act was directed to be released on terms and conditions to be decided by the Special Court.

¶23

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the instant application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that there is no other person claiming supurdagi of the vehicle in question.

¶24

Considering the submissions advanced at bar and upon perusal of record of the case, this court finds that the investigation against co-accused Heera is pending under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. This court also finds that no order of seizure of impugned vehicle has been made by the trial Court or the appellate court. Thus, following the precedent law, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in exercise of the inherent powers conferred upon this Court by virtue of Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court deems it just and appropriate to release the vehicle in question, Aadhar Card and other documents regarding car purchase and insurance in favour of the applicant-appellant on

[2024:RJ-JD:11249]

[CRLMA-77/2024]

(3 of 3)

interim custody till conclusion of the present appeal provided the applicant-appellant furnishes a Supurdaginama of Rs.3,00,000/and a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court below. The applicant-appellant shall also submit an affidavit before the learned court below that till disposal of the appeal pending before this Court, he will neither sell the vehicle in question; nor otherwise part with it or create any third party rights over the same; and will not use it for any illegal purposes whatsoever.

¶29

The criminal misc. application (77/2024) is allowed in these terms.

¶30

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶31

84-Prashant/-

Jarneilsingh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jarneilsingh 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

Kapil Vs State of Rajasthan

Banshi Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamal Deep Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Bajiya Vs State of Rajasthan

Tejpal Hudda Vs State of Rajasthan