[2026:RJ-JD:7017]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 152/2026 Manish S/o Shri Sharvan, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Pithawas, Jodhpur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Karwasra Mr. Mahaveer Bhanwariya For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Chandawat, DyGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

06/02/2026

1. By way of filing of the instant criminal revision petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat, District Pali in Misc. Case No. 03/2026 (CIS No. 03/2026), whereby the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 503 of the BNSS for release of the seized vehicle was rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the seized vehicle, namely Hyundai Creta bearing registration No. DL-5-CP- 3291, stands registered in the name of the petitioner’s mother, who has placed her consent (through an affidavit) on record and has no objection if the vehicle in question is released in favour of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the person best entitled to interim custody of the vehicle and there is no rival claim.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the criminal revision petition.

4. Considering the submissions and following the judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in AIR 2003 SC 638, and the order dated 18.11.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2005/2022 [SLP (Crl.) No. 7280/2022] titled as Sainaba Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr., wherein it has been emphasized that seized vehicles should not be allowed to remain in police custody for a long period and can be released on appropriate terms and conditions even in cases arising out of special enactments, such as NDPS Act, and having regard to the settled position of law that continued retention of the vehicle serves no useful purpose when ownership is not in dispute and the vehicle is not required for evidentiary purposes, this Court is of the view that the impugned order suffers from infirmity. The ends of justice would be met by releasing the vehicle on appropriate terms and conditions, without prejudice to the merits of the trial.

5. Consequently, the criminal revision petition is allowed. The order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat, District Pali in Misc. Case No. 03/2026 (CIS No. 03/2026) is set aside. It is directed that the seized vehicle, namely Hyundai Creta bearing registration No. DL-5-CP-3291, shall be released in favour of the petitioner on interim custody till conclusion of the trial, provided he furnishes a supurdginama of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) along with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court below, subject to such other conditions as the Court below may deem fit to impose.

(FARJAND ALI),J

149-Pramod/-