Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 13479
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
LOKESH KUMAR MEENA SON OF SHRI MAGAN LAL MEENA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMP / 4502 / 2025
Based on the provided legal document, the following key points are relevant:
-
The petitioner, Lokesh Kumar Meena, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the rejection of his application for the release of his vehicle (RJ-34-CA-7561) seized in connection with FIR No. 132/2025 under the NDPS Act (!) (!) .
-
The vehicle was seized during an investigation related to contraband recovered from co-accused persons, but the petitioner is not implicated as an accused in the FIR and claims no involvement in the incident (!) (!) .
-
The investigation has been completed, and the involvement of the petitioner was not established during the investigation (!) (!) .
-
The court observed that the vehicle's release on interim basis depends on the scenario under which the contraband was seized. Since the petitioner is not named in the FIR and is not an accused, the case falls under the scenario where the owner or a third-party occupant is not implicated as an accused (!) (!) .
-
The court noted that, in such circumstances, the vehicle should normally be released in the interim on superdari, provided the petitioner fulfills certain conditions, including maintaining the vehicle's identity, producing it when required, furnishing photographs, giving an undertaking not to use it for illegal purposes, and executing a bond with sureties (!) (!) - (!) .
-
Accordingly, the court allowed the petition, stayed the proceedings, and disposed of pending applications, permitting the petitioner to have the vehicle released under the specified conditions (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance with drafting legal documents related to this case.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4502/2025 Lokesh Kumar Meena Son of Shri Magan Lal Meena, Resident of Aagadi, District Karauli (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta with Mr. Hernab Saraswat Ms. Chanchal Sharma Mr. Uttkarsh Goyal Mr. Rahul Sharma Ms. Apoorv For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
28/11/2025
1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition, a chal- lenge has been made to the impugned order dated 20.06.2025 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS) case, Jaipur Metro-I by which the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 497 BNSS for release of the vehicle bearing No. RJ-34-
CA-7561 has been rejected.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR No. 132/2025 was registered with the Police Station Kanota, Jaipur City (East) for the offences under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act against the co-accused persons wherein certain contraband was recovered and the vehicle in question was seized. Counsel submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle and the peti- tioner has no concern whatsoever with the alleged incident. Coun- sel submits that the petitioner has not been implicated as an ac- cused in the aforesaid FIR. Counsel submits that under these cir- cumstances, an application was submitted by the petitioner seek- ing Supurdagi of the vehicle before the Court below but the same has been rejected on a technical count that the investigation is pending and the charge-sheet has not been submitted. Counsel submits that the investigation may take its time but in the mean- time, the vehicle which is lying at the police station would get damaged and spoilt if not released on interim Supurdagi, hence interference of this Court is warranted.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by coun- sel for the petitioner and submits that still the matter is at investi- gation stage and the charge-sheet has not been submitted, hence the trial Court has not committed any error in rejecting the appli- cation submitted by the petitioner, hence this criminal misc. peti-
tion is liable to be rejected.
4. This Court vide order dated 04.08.2025, instructed the learned Public Prosecutor to produce the status of the investiga-
tion of the impugned FIR.
5. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, a detailed factual report of the investigation conducted by the Officer has been furnished by the SHO, Police Station Transport Nagar, Jaipur (North). It has been apprised at the Bar that the investigation of the present FIR No. 132/2025 registered with the Police Station Kanota has been handed over to the SHO Police Station, Transport Nagar, Jaipur.
6. The factual report so furnished by the Investigating Officer indicates that the involvement of the petitioner was not found to be proved during the course of investigation.
7. The factual report furnished by the Investigating Officer is ordered to be taken on record.
8. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the peti- tioner and looking to the factual report of the investigation so fur- nished by the SHO Police Station, Transport Nagar which clearly reflects that the involvement of the petitioner has not been found to be proved and the petitioner has not been implicated as an ac-
cused.
9. Now the question which remains for consideration before this Court is whether under these circumstances, the vehicle seized under the provisions of the NDPS Act can be released on interim Supurdagi or not?
10. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bishwajit Dey Vs. State of Assam while deciding the Criminal Appeal No. 87/2025 on 07.01.2025 has dealt with the issue involved in the instant pe- tition and has held that there are broadly four scenarios/circum- stances under which the cases involving the release of vehicle on Supurdagi, seized under the provisions of the NDPS are requir
