Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 12598
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
MANSI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMP/4125/2018
The court has the discretion to order the release of seized property if it is satisfied that the property is not required for the purposes of the investigation or trial.
Headnote:
MOVABLE PROPERTY - RELEASE - SECTION 451 CRPC - COURT'S DISCRETION - PECULIAR FACTUAL MATRIX
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought the release of movable assets seized by the police during an investigation. The assets included ACs, fans, geysers, LED TVs, printers, and chairs.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the movable assets were likely to be damaged if not released and ordered their immediate release on Supurdaginama to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Issues: Whether the court could order the release of movable assets seized during an investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it has the discretion to order the release of seized property if it is satisfied that the property is not required for the purposes of the investigation or trial.
Final Decision: The court ordered the release of the movable assets seized by the police.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4125/2018
Mansi Spouse/o Manoj Verma, Aged About 30 Years, Agarsen
Nagar, E-203, Prop. Somansi Beauty Parlour
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. SK Verma.
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. M.S. Bhati, PP.
Mr. Vijay Purohit.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
11/01/2023
The matter comes up on an application (IA No.1/2022) for
early listing of the petition. However, with the consent of learned
counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard finally.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that movable
assets in question, like AC, Fan, Geyser, LED TV, Printer, Chairs of
various types, may be ordered to be released. In this regard,
learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court
towards the ‘Fard Jabti’ dated 31.08.2015, which is at page 56 of
the petition.
However, qua the other assets, learned counsel for the
petitioner does not press the prayer for release thereof at this
stage, but seeks liberty for the petitioner to take appropriate legal
recourse, in relation thereto, in case any occasion arises.
Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the aforesaid
submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-4125/2018]
After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as
perusing the record of the case, this Court finds that all 13 items
mentioned in the ‘Fard Jabti’ at page 56 of the petition, are of
such a nature, that, if the same are not released, they shall be
reduced to scrap.
Thus, looking into the peculiar factual matrix of the present
case, this Court directs immediate release of the movable
assets/articles, like AC, Fan, Geyser, LED TV, Printer, Chairs of
various types, as mentioned in ‘Fard Jabti’ dated 31.08.2015
(page 56 of the petition) and ‘Fard Jabti’ dated 04.09.2015, in
favour of the present petitioner, on Supurdaginama, to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. However, as far as the
immovable assets in question are concerned, the petitioner shall
be at liberty to file an appropriate application for release of such
assets/articles (other than the assets/articles already ordered to
be released by the present order, irrespective of the
asset(s)/article(s) falling under any head).
The present misc. petition stands disposed of accordingly.
The application (IA No.1/2022) for early listing of the petition as
well as other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
48-nirmala/-
