Sukhwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 October, 2022
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner has been involved in the above-said FIR as he is the owner of
car in question and even the SHO had submitted a report to the effect that
1 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 15-10-2022 22:22:36 :::
CRM-M-40196-2022 -2-
they have no objection in case the vehicle is released to the owner. It is
further submitted that a very onerous condition has been imposed for the
release of the said car as the security which has been sought is in the form
of cash security or bank guarantee equivalent to the value of the
conveyance thereof. It is stated that in similar circumstances, a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-17207-2022 titled as
"Amandeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab", decided on 26.04.2022, after
considering the provisions of Sections 78(2) of the Punjab Excise Act,
1914 and after relying upon a judgment of Division Bench of this Court
in case CWP-24941-2019 titled as "Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab",
dated 28.01.2020, modified the order and had directed that instead of
furnishing the cash security or bank guarantee of Rs.2,00,000/-, the
petitioner shall furnish a solvent surety of the like amount in question.