[2026:RJ-JD:299]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8139/2025 Ramandeep Kaur W/o Gurdeep Singh, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Village 34 Ksd Budhrawali District Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.R. Godara For Respondent(s) : Mr. H.S. Jodha, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

06/01/2026

1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 25.06.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Misc. Case No.53/2025 (CIS No.53/2025), filed connection with FIR No.114/2025, P.S. Rajiasar, District Sri Ganganagar and the vehicle Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.RJ-13-CE-7560 may be released to the power of attorney holder on superdari.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 was pleased to hold that the vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked for a long period of time in the police station as the same shall gather rust and shall not remain useful thereupon. Learned counsel therefore submits that the impugned order dated 18.03.2025 whereby the prayer for release of vehicle in favour of the petitioner was refused, deserves to be set aside.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for release of the vehicle.

4. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283, the present petition is allowed and the learned trial Court is directed to release the vehicle SUV Hyundai bearing registration No.RJ-13-CE- 7560, which has been seized as case property, to the power of attorney holder on supurdginama by imposing the following conditions:-

a) That the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification;

b) That the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the trial court for proposed identification of the case property;

c) That the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder shall execute Supurdginama/ indemnity bond and two sureties bond to the satisfaction of the trial court, and d) The trial court is empowered to impose any other conditions in the Supurdginama/indemnity bond and surety bonds to be fulfilled by the petitioner as well as power of attorney holder, which it may deem fit.

5. Needless to say, the trial Court shall first verify that receiver is power of attorney holder and the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question before releasing the same.

6. Consequently, the present criminal misc. petition is allowed.

7. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J

197-Hanuman/-