Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.32 seconds)

Pareshkumar Jaykarbhai Brahmbhatt vs State Of Gujarat on 15 December, 2017

4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent- State vehemently contended that the muddamal vehicle was involved in the offence under the Act and that in view of the embargo contemplated under the provisions of section 98 of the Act, the Courts below are not empowered to release the muddamal vehicle. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of this Court (Coram:J.B. Pardiwala, J.) in the case of Pareshkumar Jaykarbhai Brahmbhatt v. State of Gujarat rendered in Special Criminal Application No.8521 of 2017 decided on 15.12.2017, wherein it has been held that the Courts below have no jurisdiction to hand over custody of the muddamal vehicle in view of the embargo under section 98 of the Act. It was submitted that a petition being S.L.P. (Cri.) No.886 of 2018 is pending before the Apex Court in respect of the said issue and therefore, no powers may be exercised by this Court by releasing the muddamal vehicle seized by the police in connection with an offence under the Act. It was, however, urged that the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to order release of the vehicle can be exercised at any time whenever the Court deems it appropriate. It was, accordingly, urged that the present petition may not be entertained.

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs State Of Gujarat on 18 November, 2002

8. Considering the factual aspects of the case and the principle rendered in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case (supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that the custody of the vehicle, if granted in favour of the petitioner on stringent terms and conditions, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the prosecution. Further, in the decisions referred to herein above, the coordinate Benches have ordered release of the muddamal vehicles on suitable conditions. Except the fact that in view of the embargo provided in Section 98 of the Act, nothing adverse has been pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor for not exercising the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 21090 - Full Document
1   2 Next