KALABHAI DEVAYATBHAI MORI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2020-12-470
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on December 16,2020

Kalabhai Devayatbhai Mori Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ashokkumar C.Joshi,J. - (1.) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to invoke extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India to release the muddamal vehicle - Hyundai Accent GLE IMM BS IV Car, bearing RTO registration No. GJ-11-AB-9046, in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11203039200533 of 2019, registered before the Mendarda Police Station, Dist.: Junagadh for the offence punishable under Sections 65(E), 81 and 98(2) of the Prohibition Act.
(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr. C. P. Chaniyara for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. L. B. Dabhi on behalf of the respondent - State through video conference. 2.1 Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service for the respondent - State. With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. Factual Matrix of the case:
(3.) The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that as per the allegations made in the FIR, there was desi liquor worth Rs.12,000/- found in the muddamal vehicle. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the muddamal vehicle. The muddamal vehicle in question is duly registered with the transport department of the government and the petitioner is the only claimant seeking the custody of the said muddamal vehicle. 3.1 It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner has directly approached this Court for release of muddamal i.e. without prior approaching to the learned concerned Court below. It is also submitted that by virtue of provisions of section 98 of the Act, there is clear embargo for handing over the custody of the vehicle used in the offence pending the trial Court, and if the vehicle would lie at the police station for more time, there will be physical damage to it and therefore, interference of this Hon'ble Court is required in the interest of justice. Further, it is submitted that otherwise, the petitioner is neither named in the FIR nor has any antecedents. 3.2 It is submitted that under the extra ordinary jurisdiction, this Court can very much entertain such petition. In support of such submission, he has relied upon the orders of the Coordinate Benches passed in Special Criminal Application Nos. 3747 of 2020 dated 27.08.2020 and 4204 of 2020 dated 08.09.2020. 3.3 In support of his submissions, the learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments of Coordinate Bench (1) in case of Ritesh Bishmber Agrawal vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 5533 of 2018 order dated 18.01.2019, (2) in case of Ganibhai Yusufbhai Jamroth vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 2776 of 2020 order dated 07.07.2020, (3) in case of Ranjitbhai Ishvarbhai Chunara (Vaghela) vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 7631 of 2019 order dated 12.06.2020, (4) in case of Zala Mahendrasinh Kirtisinh vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 2717 of 2020 order dated 26.06.2020, (5) in case of Prajapati Rajendrakumar Rameshbhai Vs. State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 2692 of 2020 order dated 14.07.2020 and also placed reliance upon the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat , 2003 AIR(SC) 638. 3.4 Accordingly, it is urged that present petition may be allowed and the muddamal vehicle may be released on any suitable conditions. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.