1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Jai Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan S.B.CR. MISC. PETITION NO.278/2008 Date of Order : March 13, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr.R.K.Charan, for the petitioner. Mr.J.P.S.Choudhary, Public Prosecutor for the State. BY THE COURT: With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being finally heard and decided at the admission stage. By the instant criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.2.2008 passed by Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh (for short, “the revisional court” hereinafter) in Criminal Revision Petition No. 21/2008 to the extent directing the petitioner to deposit the amount four times of the cost of the diesel which has been seized by the police while releasing the vehicle on “Supurdginama”. 2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle Tanker bearing registration No.G.J.-12W-9011 is registered in name of petitioner Jai Singh s/o Ranidan. The petitioner moved an application before the District Collector, Hanumangarh for release of the vehicle which was seized by the police while it was found transporting 5000 litres of the diesel in violation of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. The application seeking release of the vehicle came to be dismissed by the District Collector vide order dated 10.01.2008. However, the revisional court allowed the revision petition and while releasing the vehicle on Supurdginama, the revisional court directed the petitioner to deposit four times of the cost of diesel. The petitioner is aggrieved only to the extent of the direction to deposit the amount four times of the cost of diesel. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has relinquished his claim for the diesel which has been seized by the police. So far as the vehicle is concerned, it has been directed to be released on Superdginama on furnishing the personal bond as mentioned in the impugned order. In addition to furnishing the personal bond and Supurdginama, the condition of depositing four times of the price of the diesel is onerous. 3 Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the vehicle has been ordered to be released on Supurdginama on furnishing the personal bond and solvent security, in addition thereto, any condition for depositing four- times of the price of the diesel appears to be onerous when the petitioner has relinquished his claim for the diesel which has been seized by the police. Consequently, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. The impugned order, to the extent of directing the petitioner to deposit four times of the price of the diesel is set aside. Rest part of the impugned order of the revisional court is maintained. (H.R. PANWAR), J. m.asif/-