26. WP 5945-2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5945 OF 2021

Shreyans Pramod @ Pramodkumar Daga

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Abhijeet Patil i/b Mr. J.G. Aradwad (Reddy) for the Petitioner.

Mrs. Veera Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.

Mr. Arun D. Phuge – Police Inspector, Solapur Taluka Police Station.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 21

^ST JANUARY, 2022

(Through Video Conferencing)

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the condition

Nos.2 and 3 imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur vide order

dated 14^th July, 2021, whilst allowing the petitioner’s application seeking

interim custody of his vehicles i.e. Mahindra XUV500 AWD W8JA PWH

Car colour P-White, bearing Registration No. MH-13/AZ-0600 and Toyota

Kirloskar Motor’s Fortuner Car Colour S-White, bearing Registration No.

MH-13/BN-3636.

Wakodikar

1/5

RUPALI

RAJESH

WAKODIKAR

Digitally

signed by

RUPALI

RAJESH

WAKODIKAR

Date:

2022.01.25

17:50:19

+0530

26. WP 5945-2021.doc

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned

Judge, whilst granting interim custody of the vehicles, directed the

petitioner to execute a Supurtnama in the sum of Rs.20,00,000/- each and

to furnish one or more solvent sureties in the like amount. He submits that

the said amount is exorbitant, considering the fact that the vehicles i.e.

Mahindra XUV500 is of the year 2012 and Fortuner Toyota is of the year

2015. He further submits that even the direction to furnish bank guarantee/

cash security of Rs. 3,00,000/- each was exorbitant considering that in one

vehicle, money and ornaments were found and in another vehicle only

clothes were found. Learned Counsel for the petitioner requested that the

said amount being exorbitant, be either waived or reduced.

4.

Learned APP opposes the application.

5.

Perused the papers. The petitioner is the owner of both the

vehicles which were seized by the Police alongwith another vehicle in

connection with C.R.No.115 of 2021 registered with the Solapur Taluka

Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 188, 201,

380, 454, 457 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. According to the

prosecution, three vehicles were used by the accused, one Mahindra

XUV500 bearing Registration No. MH-13/AZ-0600 for carrying money

and ornaments, one Fortuner of Toyota bearing registration No. MH-13 BN

Wakodikar

2/5

26. WP 5945-2021.doc

3636 for clothes, and one vehicle carrying no items. All the three vehicles

were seized by the Income Tax department under the provisions of the

Income Tax Act. Admittedly, the petitioner is not an accused in the said

case. It is the allegation of the prosecution that the accused in the said case

had used the petitioner’s said vehicles i.e. one one Mahindra XUV500

bearing registration No. MH-13 AZ 0600 and Fortuner of Toyota bearing

registration No. MH-13 BN 3636 in the commission of the offence. It is

not in dispute that the petitioner filed an application and sought interim

custody of the vehicles. The said application was allowed by the learned

Sessions Judge vide order dated 14^th July, 2021 on the certain terms and

conditions. The operative part of the order reads thus;

“(1) Criminal Revision Application No. 16/2021 is allowed.

(2) Mahindra XUV500 AWD W8JA PWH Car colour P-White,

bearing Registration No. MH-13/AZ-0600, Chesis No.

MA1YL4HJUC6D82174, Engine No. HJC4D24979 be handed

over to the petitioner by way of interim custody on his executing

before the concerned Court Supurtnama in the sum of

RS.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs only) and on furnishing

one or more solvent surety/sureties in the like amount. The

petitioner shall also furnish bank guarantee/cash security of Rs.

3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs only) before the concerned

Court.