Criminal Revision No. 150 of 2004 -1- *** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 150 of 2004 Date of decision: January 14, 2008 State of Haryana .....Petitioner Versus Jai Pal and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. S.S.Goripuria, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the petitioner. Mr. J.S.Sneta, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. RAJESH BINDAL, J. The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated September 10, 2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Jind whereby in revision filed by respondents against order dated August 30, 2003 passed by learned Magistrate rejecting the prayer for release of the vehicle on superdari was set aside and the impounded vehicle was directed to be released on superdari on furnishing of superdaginama by its registered owner in the sum of Rs. 2 lacs with one surety in the like amount. Briefly facts are that the vehicle in question was impounded under the Excise Act on July 12, 2003 and no action had been taken in the case. Keeping in view the fact that condition of the vehicle would deteriorate, in case it remained in police custody, respondents moved an application for release of the same on superdari, which was rejected by learned Magistrate but prayer was accepted by learned Additional Sessions Judge. The vehicle in question is TATA 407 and is of 1996 model. More than 4 years have elapsed ever since the same was impounded but as submitted by learned counsel for the respondents till date no action has been taken in the case. The case property in the present case was the pouches of country made liquor which were seized from the vehicle. According to the Criminal Revision No. 150 of 2004 -2- *** respondents, the goods were in packed condition and they were not in knowledge as to what has been actually packed in that. Keeping in view the fact that the retention of the vehicle in the police custody for long time would have certainly deteriorate the condition thereof, in the interest of justice, in my opinion, learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly directed the release thereof on furnishing surety for a sum of Rs. 2 lacs to safeguard its deterioration and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed. January 14, 2008 (Rajesh Bindal) Pka Judge