Allowed

Reena Kumari D/O Pappuram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Jan 2024CRLR/1893/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision petition seeking release of a seized scooter. Incriminating drugs were recovered from another accused, not the petitioner. The Court quashed the trial court's order dismissing the release application and directed restoration of the vehicle on specific bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dated 31.08.2023. Directed release of the scooter on personal bond with conditions.

Reena Kumari D/O Pappuram Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

(1 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:2636]

[CRLR-1893/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶5

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1893/2023

¶6

Reena Kumari D/o Pappuram, R/o Plot No. 704, Beed Sarkari Kacchi Basti, Jda Ke Paas, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Mohd. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashwant Kankhadia, PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶13

Order

¶14

16/01/2024

¶15

The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of three days in filing the revision petition is allowed.

¶16

The present criminal revision petition is filed against the order dated 31.08.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Jaipur Metro-I, whereby, application under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. for handing over the vehicle No.RJ-14-KG-4471 was dismissed.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial court vide order dated 31.08.2023 dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. for releasing the scooty vehicle No.RJ-14-KG-4471. He also submits that petitioner is registered owner of the said vehicle and contraband article containing 9.80 Gms. of Smack was recovered

[2024:RJ-JP:2636]

[CRLR-1893/2023]

(2 of 3)

from other accused Rahul Meena, to whom the petitioner bona fidely give the vehicle.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that no recovery of any contraband article was effected from the petitioner. The petitioner was not aware about the fact that Rahul Meena was carrying contraband articles. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the learned trial court dated 31.08.2023 may be set aside and possession of the vehicle may be handed over to the petitioner.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor defends the impugned order passed by learned trial court.

¶24

Considered the fact that petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle, contraband article was recovered from the other accused Rahul Meena and no recovery of any contraband article was recovered from the present petitioner.

¶25

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat [2002 (9) SCC 283] , has opined that it is no use of keeping such seized vehicle at the Police Stations for a long period and keeping the vehicle in an open place is not only loss to the nation but to the property of the nation.

¶26

Thus, considering the above argument and keeping in view the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat (supra), the instant revision petition is allowed and the order dated 31.08.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside and the vehicle No.RJ-14-KG-4471 in question is ordered to be released on 'supardgi' till the completion of the trial upon following conditions:-

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:2636]

[CRLR-1893/2023]

(a) the petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court and give undertaking to produce the vehicle No.RJ14-KG-4471 in the Court as and when required to do so.

¶31

(b) the petitioner shall get the vehicle scooty 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.

¶32

(c) the personal bond of the petitioner and bonds of sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and his sureties and the bonds of sureties shall further carry the photographs of persons identifying them before the Court which is with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

¶33

(d) the petitioner shall undertake further not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle scooty and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

¶34

(e) the petitioner shall not allow the vehicle No.RJ14-KG-4471, to be used for any antisocial activities.

¶35

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶36

47-SURAJ KUMAR

Reena Kumari D/O Pappuram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reena Kumari D/O Pappuram 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

Juvenile X S/O Late Shri Raju Vs State of Rajasthan

Jay Kumar Sharma Son of Sanwarmal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Khilauni S/O Kishan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Sharma S/O Late Sh. Kalyan Sahay Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Banti S/O Shri Ramesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Ram Kaur Vs State