[2026:RJ-JP:4908] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1245/2025 Rashid S/o Yameen, R/o House No. 21 Village Tabli, District Mujaffar Nagar (Uttar Pradesh) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary To The Homes, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The District Collector, Dholpur (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 31/01/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the learned District Collector and District Magistrate, Dholpur in Case No.10/2023 arising out of FIR No.386/2022, registered at PS Maniya, District Dholpur for offences punishable under Sections 3, 5, 6 & 8 of Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle i.e. Truck/Container No.RJ-05-GA-8385 on supardaginama has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question. He submits that the vehicle after being seized is lying in open place at the Police [2026:RJ-JP:4908] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1245/2025] Station and will be damaged and rendered useless if continued to be lying at the open place. He submits that charge-sheet has been filed by the Police before the concerned Police Station and therefore, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle lying unattended at the police station during trial. He thus submits that these are just grounds to direct the vehicle in question to be handed over to the petitioner on Supardaginama. Reliance has been placed by the counsel upon the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Vs. State of Rajasthan [Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.1910-1911/2024, decided on 26.02.2024]. 3. Learned State counsel has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle in question and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle lying unattended at the police station during trial; and following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad (supra), this Court deems it proper to direct that the interim custody of the vehicle deserves to be given to the petitioner, who is the registered owner thereof during the pendency of the trial. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Misc. Petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the learned District Collector and District Magistrate, Dholpur in Case [2026:RJ-JP:4908] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1245/2025] No.10/2023 is hereby quashed and learned District Collector and District Magistrate, Dholpur is directed to release the vehicle in question i.e. Truck/Container bearing No. RJ-05-GA-8385 in favour of the petitioner on furnishing a Bank Guarantee of Rs.2 Lakhs and the surety for the remaining sum to which the vehicle was insured on the date of seizure. The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking to the District Magistrate, Dholpur that he shall not sell, transfer or alienate the vehicle in question without permission of the District Magistrate, Dholpur and that he shall not use the vehicle for any illegal and unlawful purpose in future. He shall also produce the vehicle before learned District Magistrate, Dholpur as and when asked upon to do so. 7. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Manoj Solanki /36