Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 335 (RAJ)

Ramesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

2007-02-14

KRISHAN KUMAR ACHARYA

body2007
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that Gas Tanker No. HR46A/0603 was seized in connection with F.I.R. No. 109/2006 of the Police Station, Sri Balaji for offence under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 3. The petitioner submitted an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. before the Collector, Nagaur. The learned Collector, Nagaur after hearing the parties vide order dated 26.12.2006 released the tanker to the petitioner on supurdginama, but he has imposed condition No. 1 asking the petitioner to furnish Bank Guarantee of Rs. 12,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the condition of asking for bank guarantee is quite onerous and unjustified which amounts to abuse of process of the Court. He has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1996 Cr LR (Raj.) 101 as well as judgment of this Court in the case of Krishi Rasayan Export. Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2002 (2) Cr LR (Raj.) 1265 . In the case of Rajendra Kumar, it was held that the condition of asking for bank guarantee is quite onerous and unjustified. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor states that the Collector, Nagaur has asked for bank guarantee only for releasing the tanker, therefore, it cannot be treated as onerous conditions. 5. I have gone through the order of the District Collector, Nagaur dated 26.12.2006. 6. In view of the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Rajendra Kumar (supra), I am of the view that the condition of furnishing Bank guarantee of Rs. 12 lacs appears to be onerous and unjustified which amounts to abuse of process of the Court. 7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is allowed and the order of the District Collector, Nagaur dated 26.12.2006 is modified and it is ordered that the petitioner instead of furnishing bank guarantee of Rs. 12 lakhs shall furnish solvent surety of Rs. 12,00,000/- along with personal bond (supurdginama) in the sum of Rs. 7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is allowed and the order of the District Collector, Nagaur dated 26.12.2006 is modified and it is ordered that the petitioner instead of furnishing bank guarantee of Rs. 12 lakhs shall furnish solvent surety of Rs. 12,00,000/- along with personal bond (supurdginama) in the sum of Rs. 12 lakhs to the satisfaction of the Collector, Nagaur to the effect that the petitioner shall produce the said tanker as and when ordered by the Collector, Nagaur and the petitioner shall not sell, transfer or alienate the said tanker to any person till the final adjudication of the matter.Petition allowed. *******