[2025:RJ-JP:39994] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6227/2025 Ramsahai Saini S/o Shri Harnarayan Saini, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Mali Mohalla, Hukkampura, Pali, District Tonk, Raj., Presently R/o Plot No. A-141, Viman Vihar, Toll Tax, Sanganer, Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Jogi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 26/09/2025 1. Petitioner is aggrieved by denying to release his vehicle Maruti Suzuki Baleno bearing No. RJ-45-CS-5271 seized in connection with FIR No. 813/2022 registered at Police Station Shipra Path, District Jaipur City (South), for offences under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC vide order dated 23.05.2024 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate No. 8, Jaipur Metropolitan-I so also against order dated 10.06.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan-I dismissing his application. 2. Counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle in question, which was seized in the present criminal case, arising out of FIR No. 813/2022 registered at Police Station Shipra Path, District Jaipur City [2025:RJ-JP:39994] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6227/2025] (South). He submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and the conclusion of the criminal trial will take its own time. There is no rival claimant to take vehicle in question on Supurdgi and petitioner is ready to abide by terms and conditions imposed by this Court to release the vehicle. If the vehicle remains in custody of the Police, its condition would deteriorate; the vehicle is parked at Police Station in an open place, so same would catch rust in dust and rain; further, the custody of vehicle with the Police is no more required during course of trial. Therefore, in such circumstances, the vehicle may be ordered to be released to petitioner on Supurdgi. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of petitioner to release the vehicle on Supurdgi. 4. Having heard counsel for parties, this Court finds that during the investigation in the FIR No. 813/2022, the vehicle in question was seized and after completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed before the Court. The criminal case is under trial and unless the trial is concluded, there is no likelihood of passing any order of confiscation of the vehicle in question. It is noticeable that the Public Prosecutor has not brought in the notice of this Court about any order of confiscation in respect of vehicle in question. Petitioner has stated himself to be the registered owner and no rival claimant to take the custody of vehicle has come forward before this Court. Therefore, this Court prima facie deems it just and proper as also expedient to release the vehicle in question in the interim custody of petitioner, however on certain conditions. [2025:RJ-JP:39994] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6227/2025] 5. Learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court delivered in case of Sunderbahi Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat [(2002) 10 SCC 283] as also on the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of the Rajasthan High Court delivered in case of Prakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan [(2010) 1 Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 507]. 6. As a result, the present criminal petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 23.05.2024 and 10.06.2024 is quashed and set aside. The vehicle in question is ordered to be released on “Supurdgi” to petitioner till completion of the criminal trial, but on fulfillment of following conditions:- “(a) the petitioner shall furnish a bank guarantee for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and supurdginama to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the trial Court with an undertaking to produce the vehicle bearing No. RJ-45-CS-5271 in the Court as and when required to do so. (b) the petitioner shall get the vehicle in question photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the case. (c) the petitioner shall undertake not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in question and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable. (d) the petitioner will not allow the vehicle in question to be used for any antisocial activities.” (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin/72