Allowed

Shyamveer S/O Niranjan, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2025CRLMP/8589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court allowed a petition to release a seized vehicle under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act to its registered owner. The court quashed an order dismissing an application for the vehicle's release, directing its return upon furnishing a personal bond, surety bond, and photograph of the vehicle.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 10.12.2024 was quashed and the vehicle was directed to be released to the petitioner on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.15,00,000 with one surety, a bond for appearance, and

Shyamveer S/O Niranjan, Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:2038]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 8589/2024

¶4

Shyamveer S/o Niranjan, Resident Of Kasganj, P.s. Maniya, District Dholpur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. R.R. Baisla, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

Order

¶12

15/01/2025

¶13

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 challenging the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District Dholpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140/2024, whereby learned trial Court dismissed the application filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 503 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for releasing vehicle of the petitioner i.e. 'Swift Dezire' bearing registration No. RJ-11-CA-8482 on ‘ Supurdginama ’.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle and there is no other claimant of the vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat reported in [(2002)10 SCC 290] and various other

[2025:RJ-JP:2038]

[CRLMP-8589/2024]

(2 of 4)

judgments passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court in Phool Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.2682/2012) , decided on 14.08.2012 and in cases of Bal Mikand vs. State reported as [1994 Cr.L.R. (Raj) 4] , Prakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.416/2010), decided on 12.03.2010 & Laxman Vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.61/2018 decided on 16.04.2018, submitted that in these cases, the vehicle in question was released on furnishing ‘S upurdginama ’ by the petitioner. Learned counsel also submitted that the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District Dholpur be quashed and vehicle of the petitioner i.e. 'Swift Dezire' bearing registration No. RJ-11-CA-8482 be released in favour of the petitioner.

¶19

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the vehicle in question was used by the petitioner for the commission of offence under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the “the Act of 1985”) and it can be a subject-matter of confiscation under Section 60 of the Act of 1985 and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for release of the said vehicle in his favour. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶20

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle and there is no other one is claiming it. Now, it is no more res integra that the vehicle seized under the

[2025:RJ-JP:2038]

[CRLMP-8589/2024]

(3 of 4)

provisions of the Act of 1985, can be released in favour of its registered owner; though, may be an accused, if no order of confiscation has been passed.

¶25

Considering the submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, this Court deems it a fit case to allow the present petition and to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 10.12.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District Dholpur.

¶26

In these circumstances, this criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly allowed. The order dated 10.12.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District Dholpur in Criminal Misc. Application No.1140/2024 is quashed and set aside with the direction that the vehicle of the petitioner i.e. 'Swift Dezire' bearing registration No. RJ-11-CA-8482 be released in favour of the petitioner on ‘ Supurdginama ’ on producing original registration certificate and on satisfying conditions:-

¶27

"(1) The petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,00,000/- with one surety of like amount 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.

¶28

(2) The petitioner 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.

¶29

(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.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:2038]

[CRLMP-8589/2024]

(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."

¶34

Stay application and all other pending applications, also

¶35

stand disposed of.

¶36

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶37

AARZOO ARORA /27-S.

Shyamveer S/O Niranjan, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamveer S/O Niranjan, 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

Dr Anil Gupta and Another Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Bhagavati Devi W/O Shri Ratan Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

King Abdulla Son of Shri Habib Khan, Vs State of Rajasthan

Khushi Sharma D/O Satish Sharma, Wife of Krishan Chand Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Babita D/O Shri Kamal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Kareena Pareek D/O Shri Surendra Kumar Pareek Vs the State of Rajasthan