Mayursinh Jaydevsinh Zala vs State of Gujarat

M.D. Shah, J.—The Petitioner has filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 23.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 2, Jamnagar in Criminal Revision Application No. 15 of 2011. The Petitioner has further prayed to release the muddamal Tavera Vehicle No. GJ-10-AP-8119 and to hand over custody of the said vehicle to the Petitioner in connection with an FIR registered before Jodiya Police Station being Prohibition C.R. No. 22 of 2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 66b, 65ae and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act.

The facts giving rise to this petition are as under:

2.1. The present Petitioner was arrested in connection with FIR registered vide Prohibition C.R. No. 22 of 2011 at Jodiya Police Station, Jamnagar for the offences punishable u/s 66-b, 65-ae and Section 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act.

2.2. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer has detained one Tavera Vehicle bearing registration No. GJ-10-A.P. -8119. The present Petitioner has submitted one application being Criminal Misc. Application No. 24 of 2011 before the learned JMFC Court, Jodiya, for getting custody of the said vehicle The learned trial Judge by his order dated 23.1.2011 has rejected the said application. When the said order was challenged before the Sessions Court, Jamnagar, by way of revision being Criminal Revision Application No. 15 of 2011, it was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 2, Jamnagar vide order dated 23.3.2011.

Heard learned advocate Mr. Virendra Baheti for the Petitioner and learned APP Mr. L.R. Pujari for the Respondent-State.

It is an undisputed fact that the said vehicle is running in the name of present Petitioner and the relevant documents were also placed on record before the trial court. If the vehicle is remained idle in police custody then damage will likely to be caused to the said vehicle.

Reliance is placed on a decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai and C.M. Mudaliar Vs. State of Gujarat, In the opinion of this Court, the custody of the vehicle should be handed over to the Petitioner by imposing certain conditions.

In view of the above, this application is allowed. The order dated 23.1.2011 passed by the learned JMFC Court, Jodiya in Criminal Misc. Application No. 24 of 2011 as well as the order dated 23.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 2, Jamnagar in Criminal Revision Application No. 15 of 2011 are hereby quashed and set aside. The custody of the vehicle in question be handed over to the present Petitioner on following conditions:

i. He shall furnish indemnity bond in the sum of Rs. 2.00 lacs (Rupees Two Lacs).

ii. A detailed panchnama shall be carried out by the Court Commissioner and the cost thereof shall be borne by the present Petitioner.

iii. The Petitioner will not transfer, dispose of, deal with the vehicle in question without permission of the trial court till the trial is over. As and when the vehicle is required during the trial, the Petitioner shall produce the same before the trial court.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.