MOHAMMED SALEEM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Miscellaneous Petition is directed against the order of the. learned Judicial Magistrate, No. 2, Jodhpur, whereby, he ordered that vehicle No. RJ -19G 0755 be released on 'Supurdginama' to Manoj Kumar (respondent No. 2) provided he furnishes a personal bond In the sum of Rs. 6 lacs with one surety In the like amount.

(2.) THE relevant facts to be notice, In short are that the vehicle bearing No, RJ 19 -G 0755 Model -1988 was sold by one Manoj Kumar (respondent No. 2) to the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 3 lacs only and that vehicle was handed -over to the petitioner on 11.12.91. On the same day, the petitioner paid Rs. 2 Lacs and balance sum of Rs. 1 lac was paid on 30.3.92. The Registration of the vehicle was also transferred in the name of the petitioner on the same day. Since 11.12.91, the petitioner was playing that vehicle. On 14.6.92 the S.H.O. Sardarpura, Police Station, Jodhpur seized the said vehicle from the possession of the petitioner in CR No. 139/92 dated 14.5.92 pertaining to the offences under Section 420, 467, 471, 392 and 120B, IPC. The seizure was reported to the Judicial Magistrate, No. 2, Jodhpur where the petitioner and non -petitioner No. 2 applied for delivery of the vehicle. Learned Magistrate has ordered to deliver the said vehicle in favour of non -petitioner No. 2.

(3.) MR . P.N. Mohanani, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has purchased the vehicle In question from the registered owner in bonafide belief and paid the sale amount to the registered owner of the Vehicle, Manoj Kumar Jam. The case, prima facie, is in favour of the petitioner, therefore, the delivery of the vehicle should be given to the petitioner. For that, he relied upon the decisions of this Court in Ishar Nath v. State of Rajasthan 1984 W.L.M. 367 and Sikander Beg v. State S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 01/90 decided on 1.4.92.