Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 110 (JK)

Davinder Singh Jasrotia v. State Of J&K

2020-02-26

RAJESH BINDAL, SINDHU SHARMA

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. This application has been filed by the applicant seeking a direction for release of vehicle (Bolero) bearing Registration No. JK02W-6666 seized by the police of Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, on 03.02.2020 vide Challan No. 34810 for using black nets. 2. Reply to the application stands filed by the respondents. 3. We have heard the applicant and the counsel for the respondents. 4. This Court on 25.09.2012 in WPPIL No. 25/2011 has observed as under: 'In view of the averments made in the applications seeking release of vehicles as also considering the statement made by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are ready to furnish undertakings before the authority concerned to the extent indicated above, the prayer for release of vehicles which stand seized by the concerned traffic police, is accepted. The applicants, however, are directed to furnish undertakings before the DIG, Traffic, Jammu Range, that they shall not ply their vehicles in violation of the directions passed by the Honble pex Court in the aforementioned case and also the Rules governing the field and in case, any adverse order is passed by this Court against the applicants, in that event, they shall surrender their vehicles before the aforesaid authority. In case, the undertakings are furnished in the manner indicated above, the vehicles of the applicants/authorized owners shall be released. However, taking into consideration the fact that despite making the public at large aware about the consequences of the plying the commercial/private vehicles in violation of the judgment of the Honble pex Court on the subject and the Rules governing the field, the applicants/authorized owners herein, who have not bothered to obey the rules and have violated the directions issued by the Honble Apex Court in the aforementioned case as also this Court, they have to be put on notice to explain their position as to why action warranted under law be not taken against them ' 5. Similar applications being CM Nos. 254, D-255, 256 & 257/2012 in WPPIL No. 25/2011 were allowed conditionally on 17.10.2012 in the following terms:- 'By the medium of these CMAs, applicants are seeking a direction from this Court for release of their vehicles, which have been seized by the police agency/traffic authorities in terms of the directions passed by this Court on the grounds taken in these CMAs. It is also prayed that instead of DIG, Traffic, Jammu Range, the concerned police agency/traffic authorities, who have seized the respective vehicles of the applicants/registered owners, be directed to release their vehicles on their furnishing the undertakings as directed by this Court vide order dated 25.09.2012. For the reasons detailed in the CMAs, the prayer made is granted. Let the vehicles be released in favour of the applicants/authorized owners in terms of order dated 25.09.2012 passed in WPPIL No. 25/2011, with a modification that instead of DIGs, the concerned police agency/traffic authority would release the vehicle after taking the undertakings. In terms of order dated 25.09.2012, applicants/authorized owners are directed to explain their position and shall furnish their response on or before the next date of hearing.' It is made clear that if the vehicle is seized in violation of the directions of the Honble Court, then the said order will govern. 5. The Supreme Court had passed orders for removal of tinted glasses in the year 2011 itself. In spite of the passage of about eight years since the date of passing of the said order, the petitioner has used the tinted glasses in his vehicle which has resulted in the seizure of said vehicle. 6. Therefore, the vehicle is ordered to be released in terms of order dated 25.09.2012 passed in WPPIL No.25/2011, as modified by order dated 17 th October 2012 on the aforesaid applications in WPPIL No. 25/2011, on deposit of ? 20,000/- before the Registrar Judicial of this Court and only after production of the receipt in that behalf, the vehicle shall be released subject to the conditions mentioned above. 7. CM, accordingly, disposed of.