SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1138

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Omaram Vishnoi - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLR / 267 / 2023
Decided On : 24-02-2025

Advocates:
Mr. Mangi Lal Vishnoi, Mr. M. R. Pareek, Special PP

Conditional release of a seized vehicle is permissible if the registered owner meets specified conditions, as established in prior case law.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 397 read with Section 401 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 451 - Revision petition for release of vehicle - The petitioner, as registered owner, sought release of vehicle seized in connection with a criminal case - Court referenced prior judgments establishing that conditional release of vehicles cannot be denied if likely to be confiscated after trial - The court allowed the petition and set conditions for the vehicle's release. (Paras 1, 3, 4, 5)

(B) Conditional Release - The court emphasized that interim custody of seized vehicles can be granted on certain conditions, as established in previous rulings. (Paras 2, 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a revision petition against the rejection of an application for the release of a vehicle seized during a criminal investigation. The vehicle was registered in the petitioner's name, and the petitioner argued for its release based on prior case law.

Findings of Court:
The court quashed the previous order and allowed the vehicle's release on specified conditions, ensuring the vehicle's availability for trial.

Issues: The main issue was whether the vehicle could be conditionally released despite being seized in a criminal case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the registered owner of a vehicle is entitled to its conditional release if it is likely to be confiscated after trial, provided certain conditions are met.

Result: Revision petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.

The petitioner has filed this criminal revision petition under Section 397 R/w 401 of IPC to assail the impugned judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by Learned Additional Session Judge, Bali, District Pali, whereby the learned trial Court rejected the application under Section 451 Cr.P.C., moved by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle Swift Dezire bearing registration No.RJ-19-CD-9545.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Public Prosecutor.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his arguments, has placed reliance on a decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered at Jaipur Bench inPrakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2010(1) Cr.L.R.(Raj.) 507. In the aforesaid judgment, the vehicle and other articles were seized from the accused for carrying contraband of small quantity just above the commercial quantity. It is in that background, the Court has acceded to the prayer of the incumbent and recorded its finding that solely for the reason that the vehicle and other articles are likely to be confiscated after trial, conditional release of the vehicle and other articles on Supurdginama and surety cannot be denied and interim custody of the vehicle and other articles can be granted to the incumbent on certain conditions.

4. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case ofSunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 and co- ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench in case of Prakash Chand (supra) has held that conditional release of the vehicle cannot be denied.

5. Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed and the order dated 19.02.2021 is hereby quashed and set aside and the vehicle Swift Dezire bearing registration No.RJ-19-CD-9545 in question is ordered to be released on ‘supardgi’ till the completion of the trial upon following conditions:-

(a) the petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.6,00,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.3,00,000/- 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.

(b) the petitioner shall get the Swift Dezire bearing registration No.RJ-19-CD-9545 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.

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

(d) the petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the Swift Dezire bearing registration No.RJ-19-CD-9545 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.

(e) the petitioner will not allow the Swift Dezire bearing registration No.RJ-19-CD-9545 to be used for any antisocial activities including for the purpose of carrying narcotics which may constitute offence under the NDPS Act.”

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top