Khem Chand vs State Of Rajasthan

This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Misc. Petition may kindly be allowed, order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Churu dated 11.12.2018 refusing to release truck and order dated 22.11.2018 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Churu may kindly be quashed and set aside and the trial court may kindlyb e directed to hand over the truck No.RJ 31 GA 3954 to the petitioner on Supurdginama during the pendency of trial.

Any other relief which may be considered in favour of the petitioner may kindly be ordered to be issued."

The pleaded case of the petitioner is that the present petitioner is a power of attorney holder of one Sikander in whose name the vehicle in question i.e. Truck bearing No. RJ31 GA 3954 was registered. The said power of attorney, pertaining to the vehicle in question was executed by Sikander on 14.08.2018 in favour of the present petitioner. The petitioner had parked the said truck loaded with excise contraband in front of the Excise Depot, Industrial Area, Churu. It has been averred in the petition that accused Hari Ram had stolen the truck alongwith liquor and was caught on 04.11.2018 and booked under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act and Section 379 of IPC. The learned court below has released the contraband but has not released the truck.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no case of Excise Act against the present petitioner and his ownership of truck pursuant to the aforementioned power of attorney is not disputed. It is also not disputed that the truck in question was stolen by Hari Ram alongwith excise articles loaded therein.

4.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is not willing to compound the offence, as he has decided to contest the case. The order passed by the learned court below, whereby release of the vehicle in question on Supurdagi was refused, has been assailed.

4.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at the Bar that no confiscation proceedings are pending qua the vehicle in question and the same is the case property. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the precedent law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, to contend that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case, has held that the vehicle should not be permitted to remain parked in the police station as the same shall gather rust and shall not remain useful.

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to refute the above position.

Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra), the present petition is allowed and the trial court is directed to release the Truck bearing No. RJ31 GA 3954 in favour of the petitioner on usual conditions, which the trial court deems fit.

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