Arif @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,praying that the order dated 19.9.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwadi,

District Alwar be set aside, whereby the said court refused to release Dumper No.HR55-B-2167, to the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at Bar that no confiscation proceedings are pending qua the vehicle and the same is case property of

case FIR No.337/2014, registered at

Police Station Bhiwadi Phase-III, District Alwar for offences under Sections 379, 120B IPC and Sections 41, 42 of Forest Act. Learned counsel

further submits that the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle in question.

Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, learned Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the proceedings for confiscation of the vehicle have to commence and

therefore, the vehicle could not be released.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, to contend that the

Supreme court has held that the vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked in the police station as same shall gather rust and shall not remain

useful.

Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), present petition is allowed and the trial court is

directed to release the vehicle seized as case property by imposing following conditions:-

(a) That the petitioner shall keep the vehicle so releasedintact and shall not change its identification.

(b) That the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and whentrial 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.

Needless to say, trial court shall make verification that the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle.