[1] SB CRIM MISC. PET 40/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION 40/2010 GOPAL LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN Date: 13.01.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Anurag Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.R. Saran, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** The present misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dausa in Criminal Revision No. 111/2009, by which the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been partly allowed but the vehicle of the petitioner has been ordered to be given on 'Supurdagi' on submitting a bank guarantee of Rs. 3.00 lacs, as also against the order dated 05.11.2009 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahwa, District Dausa in Criminal Case No. 45/2002 directing to deposit a sum of Rs. 3.00 lacs before submitting 'Supurdaginama' and surety bond. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the registered owner of vehicle in question i.e. Mahindra Jeep bearing Registration No. RJ-05/C-0167. In support of his submissions, he also placed reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Hari Mohan Agarwal Vs. State of Raj. & Anr., reported in 1996(2) RLR 595, [2] SB CRIM MISC. PET 40/2010 wherein this Court held that” criminal court has no power to go into question of title- A person from whose possession the property is taken is the person entitled to possession thereof unless he can be shown to have committed offence in respect of the same- As the R-2 was in lawful possession of the truck and the same was taken into possession from him, R-2 was entitled for its delivery on 'superdginama'”. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the orders impugned dated 05.11.2009 and 27.11.2009 passed by the trial Court and the Revisional Court respectively. I have also gone through the judgment referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in view of ratio decided by this Court, the order impugned dated 05.11.2009 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahwa, District Dausa and the order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dausa are hereby quashed and set aside and it is ordered that the vehicle in question shall be given to the petitioner on 'supurdagi' on his furnishing a solvent security to the tune of Rs. one lac to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall not transfer or alienate the vehicle in question nor he shall bring any change in its [3] SB CRIM MISC. PET 40/2010 condition. Further, the petitioner shall produce the vehicle in question before the trial Court as and when ordered by the Court. With these observations, the criminal misc. petition stands partly allowed. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/