Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Samsuddin @ Samser vs State on 27 May, 2020
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 776/2020
Samsuddin @ Samser S/o Shri Noora Ji, Aged About 35 Years,
By Caste Musalman, R/o Sodpura, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State, Through P.p.
2. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology,
Khanij Bhawan, 18-19, Nakoda Colony, Udaipur Road,
Beawar, Distt. Ajmer (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Johari through Video
Conferencing on Jitsi Meet Application
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Digvijay Singh Jasol Deputy Govt.
Counsel through Video Conferencing
on Jitsi Meet Application.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order 27/05/2020 Lawyers are not appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona virus (COVID-19).
Heard learned counsel for the parties through Video Conferencing on Jitsi Meet Application.
The petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 13/02/2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jetaran, District Pali in Criminal Revision No.07/2020 whereby while dismissing the revision petition, the order dated 04/02/2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Barr, District Pali in Criminal Case No. 31/2020 (Downloaded on 27/05/2020 at 08:34:11 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMP-776/2020] dismissing the application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner seeking release of subject vehicle on Supurdginama, has been upheld.
Learned counsel for the parties agree that the controversy involved in the present case is covered by the order dated 11/05/2018 passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No. 2619/2018, Prakash vs. State of Rajasthan.
At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute that the testing report of the material confiscated also reflects that the material which was being carried is "ramming mass". However, he prays that learned trial Court may be directed to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law without having been influenced by the report in question.
In view of the order passed by this Court in Prakash vs. State of Raujasthan (supra) wherein reliance was placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, this Court deems it proper to allow the present petition.
Accordingly, the present criminal misc. Petition is allowed and the order dated 04/02/2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Barr as well as order dated 13/02/2020 passed by learned ASJ, Jetaran, District Pali are quashed and set aside. The trial court is directed to release the subject vehicle i.e. Trailer bearing registration No.RJ-14/GB-1138 seized as case property by imposing following conditions:-
a) That the petitioner shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification. (Downloaded on 27/05/2020 at 08:34:11 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-776/2020]
b) That the petitioner shall produce the vehicles as and when trial court requires the same for proposed identification of the case property.
c) That the petitioner shall execute Supurdaginama/indemnity bond and bonds by two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
(d) The trial court is empowered to impose any or other conditions in the Supurdaginama/indemnity bond and surety bonds to be furnished by the petitioner and sureties, which it may deem fit.
(e) Learned trial Court shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law without having been influenced by the report in question.
Needless to say, trial court shall make verification that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 64-SanjayS/-
(Downloaded on 27/05/2020 at 08:34:11 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)