Jai Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Gopal Krishan Sharma, J.—This is petition u/s 482 Cr. Procedure Code against the order of Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 3-5-1986, by which he dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner Jai Singh for the return of motor-cycle which was confiscated by the Police.

The notice of this petition was given to the Public Prosecutor on 23-1-1987 and he was directed to produce the case-diary today. The learned Public Prosecutor states that he has not received the case-diary and he is unable to assist the Court with regard to this case. This is very sad affair that the State is so negligent and the Investigating Officer is so powerful that inspite of the direction of the Court, he did not produce the case-diary today. This Court being the highest Court of the State cannot work on the mercy of the Investigating Officer. If the case-diary is not submitted by the Investigating Officer, it is the matter between the Public Prosecutor and the Government of Rajasthan. Court has nothing to do so far as the administration of the Police Department is concerned. I see no reason to adjourn this case on this ground where the Investigating Officer has disobeyed the order of this Court.

Mr. Kaushik, learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that a case u/s 307 IPC was registered at Police Station Shastri Nagar and in that FIR there is no allegation against the petitioner Jai Singh as well as no fact has been mentioned that any offence has been committed when this motor-cycle was used I have perused the order of the learned Sessions Judge who has rejected the revision petition in a very cursory manner. As there is nothing on the record to show that the motor-cycle was any more needed by the Police and nor it was argued by the learned Public Prosecutor that the motor-cycle should not be released under such circumstances, it means that this motor-cycle has been unnecessarily kept in custody by the Police. If at all they need this motor-cycle for the purpose of identification by the witnesses, the purpose could be served if a photograph of this motorcycle showing the clear registration number be taken and kept on the record. Therefore, the order of the learned Sessions Judge is set aside and this petition is accepted. It is directed that photograph of the motor-cycle, as directed above, be taken immediately and the motor-cycle be handed over to the petitioner on "Supardagi Nama" having a surety of Rs. 20,000/- for producing in the same condition as and when desired by the Court. The motor-cycle will be handed over to the petitioner on showing the registration number, the proof of his ownership, before the Investigating Officer.