JUDGMENT 1. - This petition is directed against the order/judgment dated July 6, 1992 of Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu. The facts of the case may be narrated in brief. The matter relates to the custody of motor vehicle (matador) bearing registration No. HR 18/0146. The said motor vehicle was seized by the police in Cr. case FIR No. 75/92 in an offence u/s. 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act. It is alleged that the said vehicle was used for transporting 500 bottles of country made liquor without any licence and it was being driven by the petitioner on 26-5-92. 2. The petitioner moved an application for the custody of the vehicle which was rejected by the learned Magistrate vide his order dated 8-6-92. In the order, the learned Magistrate, has mentioned that the petitioner had submitted the registration certificate and the insurance certificate of the vehicle as well as his driving licence. The vehicle was registered in the name of one Pradeep Singh s/o Ram Singh, who had sold the said vehicle to the petitioner for which an affidavit of the registered owner Pradeep Singh, duly attested by the Magistrate, was also filed. 3. The revision filed by the petitioner was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge on 6-7-92. The petitioner has approached to this Court u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for the custody of the said vehicle during the pendency of the criminal case. The learned counsel submits that besides the petitioner, there was/is no other claimant of the vehicle. He further submitted that all the documents relating to the vehicle were in possession of the petitioner and they were produced before the trial Magistrate but the application of the petitioner for the custody, of the vehicle was rejected on the ground that the vehicle could be forfeited and the vehicle shall be required at the time of the evidence. It was also mentioned by the learned Magistrate that the petitioner was involved in other cases. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner was not involved in any similar matter u/s 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act. Learned counsel also submitted that if the vehicle is left in the custody of the police in an open place, then, by the time the criminal case is decided it will be rendered useless and the parts of the vehicle shall be taken away by others. 4. Learned counsel also submitted that if the vehicle is left in the custody of the police in an open place, then, by the time the criminal case is decided it will be rendered useless and the parts of the vehicle shall be taken away by others. 4. It is no doubt true that the accusation against the petitioner is that he was transporting 500 bottles of country-made liquor without a licence. It is also true that the petitioner was involved in some other cases, but, none of the case was u/s. 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act. Some of the facts are not in dispute before me:- (i) that the vehicle was in possession of the petitioner at the time of commission of the offence as per the prosecution case; (ii) that the petitioner had submitted the documents concerning the vehicle in question and he had also filed an affidavit of the registered owner showing that the vehicle was sold to him for consideration; (iii) that nobody else was/is of the claimant of the said vehicle; (iv) the trial of the case is likely to take time and by the time the case is decided, the vehicle may be rendered useless. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, it has been the practice of this Court to give such vehicle in custody on some conditions. 6. Consequently, I allow this petition and direct that the motor vehicle (matador) bearing registration No. HR 18/0146 shall be given in the custody of the petitioner pending the conclusion of the enquiry/trial, as the case maybe, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall furnish a `superdaginama' in the sum of Rs. one lac with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khetri; (ii) that the petitioner shall keep the vehicle in the same condition without changing the colour even. He shall not transfer or otherwise dispose of the said vehicle to any other person without the prior permission of the trial court; (iii) that the petitioner shall furnish three coloured photographs of cabinet size to be taken in different angles showing the registration number of the vehicle. He shall not transfer or otherwise dispose of the said vehicle to any other person without the prior permission of the trial court; (iii) that the petitioner shall furnish three coloured photographs of cabinet size to be taken in different angles showing the registration number of the vehicle. The said photographs be kept in the file of the trial court; (iv) that he shall produce the said vehicle as and when asked for to do so by the trial court or any other court during the pendency of enquiry/trial, as the case may be. 7. The petition is allowed as indicated above. *******