Key Points: - The case deals with expeditious and judicious exercise of powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for custody and disposal of seized property pending trial in NDPS Act cases (!) (!) . - The court allowed the revision, directing release of the mobile on supardaginama upon furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 10,000, after noting investigation completion and charge-sheet filed (!) (!) . - The judgment emphasizes that Section 451 Cr.P.C. enables orders for custody, sale, or disposal of property pending inquiry or trial, and that property may include items used in offence or produced before the court (!) (!) (!) . - It references the need to avoid unnecessary custody and suffering to the owner and to proceed promptly with proper panchnama, bond, security, and possible photographic evidence before returning property to complainant or rightful owner (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The decision cites Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (SC) to support expeditious and judicious exercise of 451 Cr.P.C. powers and discusses handling of valuable articles, currencies, and vehicles, including possible handover on bond and bank locker custody, or auction if unclaimed (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The trial court was required to verify ownership of the mobile before releasing it (!) . - The revision petition was allowed with directions to release the mobile on supardaginama on usual conditions and bank guarantee of Rs. 10,000; prior orders of similar Rajasthan cases are referenced (Pannaram Jat, Amra) (!) .

How to exercise section 451 Cr.P.C. powers for custody and disposal of seized property pending trial?

What is the scope of "property" under Section 451 Cr.P.C. as interpreted in NDPS cases?

What is the proper procedure and conditions for releasing seized mobile/valuables on supardaginama with a bank guarantee?