JUDGMENT 1. - This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has arisen in the following circumstances. 2. Petitioner Abdul Rauf purchased an Ambassador Car RJZ 2685 from D P Sharma of Ajmer on 30-5-72 which has a secret chamber in the back seat. He plies this car as a taxi on hire. On 27-3-76 the car was undertaking journey towards Jodhpur. It was intercepted by the police and some opium was recovered from its secret chamber. 3. It appears that the police registered a case under the Opium Act against the petitioner and the passengers who are all on bail. No challan is said to have been filed as yet. 4. The petitioner applied to the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jodhpur Court No 1 for the release of the vehicle to him pending investigation and trial. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 27-5-76 rejected the application. 5. The petitioner went in Revision against this order to the Court of Session The learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 7-6-76 rejected the revision petition because the order of the learned Magistrate dated 27-5-76 was only an interlocutory order. The learned Judge however, observed that : "In such cases in my opinion, it is always better that the property may be handed over on a `Supurdginama'. 6. In pursuance of these observations, an application was made again before the learned Magistrate for the return of the vehicle on a Supurdginama' but the learned Magistrate by his order dated 16-6-76 again rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that a car had a secret chamber which is designed for the purpose of smuggling opium. It was involved in smuggling of opium in some earlier case also. The learned Magistrate was apprehensive that the vehicle may again be used for the same nefarious purpose. 7. Having thus met failure below, the petitioner has made this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. I have heard arguments and considered the matter. It appears that the police do not require the vehicle any more for purposes of investigation. The learned Magistrate was apprehensive that the vehicle may again be used for the same nefarious purpose. 7. Having thus met failure below, the petitioner has made this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. I have heard arguments and considered the matter. It appears that the police do not require the vehicle any more for purposes of investigation. I agree with the learned Sessions Judge that in a case like this, it is proper to deliver the vehicle to the accused on a proper `Supurdginama' ensuring that the vehicle shall he kept in the same condition (including the secret chamber) as it was at the time of seizure, is produced before the Police or the court as and when required, and is surrendered to the court if eventually an order of its confiscation is made. It seems io me that it will be in the interest of Justice to deliver the vehicle to the petitioner pending investigation and trial. This is therefore, a fit case in which inherent jurisdiction of this court should be exercised. 8. Accordingly, 1 accept this petition and direct that the learned Magistrate concerned shall deliver the aforesaid vehicle to the petitioner Abdul Rauf upon his executing an adequate `Sudurdginama' as indicated above in the Court of the Magistrate. *******