i3 THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUj CRMP. No. 3^'V /2010 PETITIONER t!S': RESPONDENTS \' VERSUS Rajesh Shukta, S/o SambhuNath Shukla, Aged about 34 years, R/o Tekanala, Bhole Nagar, Nagpur, Maharastara. Through Power Attorney holder Ravindra Banjare; S/o Bhushanlal Banjare, Aged about 23 years, Village Bhadri, P.0. Takhatpur, Tah-Mungali, District - Bilaspur, C.G. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Nawagarh, District Dyrg, C.G. 'F'E-ntION UNDER SECTION 482'r OF Cr.P.C. FQR sl!ijRai^MAOFVEHICLEC.G.04-JB-1827,^ s^4 tet|t Aue jo sousyo JBIIIUIS ^o UOISSILUUIO^ sjnsue pinoM sq 'jnoAe^ siq ui 9|-| 'SIOiqSA 34} }0 J3UMO pBjaisiBej sq) ^o djqsjeuMO ey} jo^ petuiejo s|0!43A 34} io diysjsuMo se JB^ se aq pinoM aiues sqi 'peseeiej }ou sil oi A|9>j!| si |eui siji se pesesjej eq Aei^ joi pesn U9sq seu aioiyeA sq} 11 SuiAiB usaq seq jeuoiutsd si|i teyi si] p uoissiLuqns jsyynj 'eiueo p 0} psBaiie si 3|Oti|8A eqi uiajayM s^se; si j8uoi}!}9d 94} iB4( peffliuqns jeuoitil •pessiiusip ueeq sey UOJSIASJ Apo}sno iuu3)ui }Q uojteojidde lepjpnr 84} Aq psssed OI.OZ/1.1./81 UOISIABJ IBUILUUO ui Bjnn 'ejetsuued psssed owz/\.l/ez psiep jepjo isui^Se •sieis S4t -ley JS/(A I •jsuoiuted 34} ^ ffUB S^8UOjt|}3d T'TeANseAuljs a^UE ht>-j a^ .ySlteji. p'SJ St .lul'ilt '•|hi->]i>i'b •soua^o J34}0 joi pesn }ou si epiysA sqi IBL)} S^9|3J Sj 8|OIL|9A 3q) ^! )eq} s)!iuqns 94} si jsuoiijied 9L|} pue aioiysA uosjed jeyio ou 'pausouoo si siiiuqns jayyn^ ei-i •p3}ejous}3p |9|0!L|9A 9U} jl PUB 3LUI}aLUOS 9>jet 9Lues eqi 'soue^o jo UOISSIIULUOO pue siseq 9jiu uo eioiusA siq ]j3UO!}!ted si(t jo^ |3SUfl09..p3ujee| u^iieijodsueji u.i pssn useq eAey i^seo 34} yioq ui pesnooe su) lou fcad eqi joi |asunoo peujes-i pisydn usaq SBI( sioiqsA syuo Sujtosfsj SSBIO ^r 'eiejtSiBeiAl rteiep jepjo uoiyM Aq 'o 1.02/ZZ'ou 'eSpnr suoissas leuoiijppv ^q p9}03J!p si uoitiisd sjui •pjeaH |suBd 'yBuis dsepejd uyg lesunoo 'jeyoo»unjy U4S OlOS-Zt-St peqow BJpuiuBl^uqsaTq.ueH: 9S ^ BSjli IftlBl^ tt^UE .te>^ ^l ^-^-^-^ tOKh J^IK tblh4S lUhlh ^Rlwiy 'sitli(&a 'hi^lhliK. te£ -^ t^ ttetktB 1»^IK> Ibll.bJ Itt. I^IKs ZZ-3 J ^',ffes^ ^^!SS31a& 3^HC-22 '^ '^^e£^'y •s^ -^ii^id^, yTil'y'ito, [«I<II'HII< an^r ira^? ..;rv^..^..3^/1^, NmMl sh*ll<»> f^^ar' sn^r^i Wt'h an^i sb^i^-Hf?^ On the other hand, submissiijin of learned counsel for the State is thatthe Courts below have reject^d petitioner's application for interim Sderation that when the vehicle was connection with offence of similar custody of the vehicle on the consjic earlier released on supurdnama ir) nature, it wasagain used in the sinf)ilar offence wherein the vehicle was again found carrying cattle, which house. From the orders passed by ttj passibility of his vehicie being misu than once, cannot be ruled out at proper t0 release the vehicle on conditions. This is so because if condition of the same would be det c^n be used for transportation purpijise would lie waste Considering the totatity of thej of the matter, it would be proper to[ petitioner on following conditions- 1. The petitioner shall not all aecused, to have any control <=bl^4)'1 ^Wdf'^T^ldl <r^-?£i^ ^T stpgii an^r were meant to be taken to butcher e Courts beiow, it is seen that when the vehicle was released on supurc^ama on the earlier occasion, it was again used for commission of simil^ir offence. However, it is found that the petitioner has not been macje accused in the cases and the |sed by other persons, may be more [this stage. Therefore, it would be ^upurdnama by imposing stringent the vehicle is not reieased, the ^riorated and it being a truck, which circumstances and various aspects release the vehicle in favour of the ^w Ravindra Banjare, who is the lover the vehicle. 2. The vehicle shali not be aliov|?ed to ply or used for transportation outside the local limits of Rai^ur city. [•v^ ife-t y Sl-HC-22 ^ '^-^ ^-Eg ^||4||c)*|, ^•dly'lti. faMKiy STT^T 'q?TcR ^'V^\Jb. \^J> I W4WI Sb<1|t*i ^te 200 f^^T' aii^i^in h-u* sn^r ^i^ yfia ..; S&503 UsAi'L, er'oigss^ .......sn^J-l^ "il ri:.;33m'^:0 wherein the vehicle is alle •,OM^1a^.._^.. J9R rit,y-e"G<80^<it&e%<^cy and th®ve .••vftA BrijTftfeia^^n,^ colour ofthe |:<.'kUYM.L.2'iSebyt,^6CiSqa, -5.....».Theve!%!ggha"be! Deepti sn^i'^giwdfei 3. On repetition of the offenc^ or commission of any other offence ^ged to be involved, this order shall jhicie shall be liable to be seized. |vehicle shall not be changed. produijsed without faii, as and when directed Mi 3£n^y.{f-i5^>©0(i[fc» Consequently, orders pass( 'gpdJJie application for interim cu^tody tothe conditions as imposed abo^i With the aforesaid observ^ off. .^..^.............oM -fe"3 ;rS;i.«.ElC£ioo»lo;ffoy ^obA sri' ci bss-ifiwo-s M-l\.M.l.O'.es=u>-lsba^3 -.^-.sn-S'^-.E^101"110' q)i<iT<"TiftTT Tfro^f ^ f^et <rai<^i< ^T sipdti sn^r sd by the Courts below are set aside of the vehicle is allowed subject ie. itions, the petition is finatly disposed A'Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Jud^e [^^firt