TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nership or possession. The challenge is against conditions 2 and 4 imposed by the trial Judge. Condition 2 is relating to furnishing security in the form of bank guarantee for the value assessed by the court below. We find no reason to interfere with that condition as the jewellery items involved are of a considerable worth. Insofar as condition 4 is concerned, the court below shall allow the claimant to adduce evidence to establish a strong prima facie entitlement to the property. It may also ascertain whether there is any rival claimant for the gold ornaments involved in the case. After considering the entire evidence on record, the trial court shall take a decision as to whether the petitioner should be directed to produce the articles before the court in the same condition as and when required by the court - matter shall be disposed by the court below as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - Crl.MC.No.6554 OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 19-5-2020 - THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR FOR THE APPELLANT : BY ADVS. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.R.RANJITH ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... execute bond for ₹ 1,50,00,000/- (One Crore fifty lakhs only) with 2 solvent sureties, each for the like sum for production of the articles before the court. 2. The petitioner shall furnish security of bank guarantee for ₹ 1,50,00,000/- before this Court. 3. The petitioner shall not use the above articles for committing any crimes. 4. The petitioner shall produce the above articles before the court in the same condition as and when required. 5. The petitioner shall produce attested photographs of the above articles counter signed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Pathanamthitta. 6. Detailed Mahazar of all the above articles shall be prepared before giving its interim custody to the petitioner. 6. Conditions 2 and 4 above are under challenge. 7. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. 8. We shall start by referring to the facts in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case. The petitioners, who were certain police inspectors, along with other police personnel, were allegedly involved in offences punishable under Sections 429, 420, 465, 468, 477A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC ). Prosecution case was that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustody, it would be open to the SHO after preparing proper panchnama to keep such articles in a bank locker. In any case, such articles should be produced before the Magistrate within a week of their seizure. If required, the Court may direct that such articles be handed over back to the Investigating Officer for further investigation and identification. However, in no set of circumstances, the Investigating Officer should keep such articles in custody for a longer period for the purpose of investigation and identification. For currency notes, similar procedure can be followed. 10. Learned single Judge mentioned in the reference order that in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case the Court did not consider the rights of a claimant who seeks release of gold ornaments in interim custody for utilising the same for his routine business. In other words, in the above decision there was no occasion for the court to pronounce on a situation where the jewellery could be given to the claimant unconditionally allowing him to sell them out to prospective customers pending trial. In our view, there is no limitation either explicitly or implicitly imposed in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of trial. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision by a learned single Judge of the High Court of Delhi in Manjit Singh v. State (2014 0 Supreme (Del) 2080). On a perusal of the facts involved in that case, it can be seen that the subject matter of dispute was a Ford Endeavour car, which was allegedly stolen by somebody. Learned single Judge issued various guidelines regarding disposal of property under Section 451 Cr.P.C. Since parameters about release of vehicles have been specifically dealt with in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case, we find the observations in Manjit Singh are only reiteration of the same. Moreover, the facts in that case are dissimilar to that in this case. 16. Another decision relevant to be mentioned in this regard is General Insurance Council and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others ((2010) 6 SCC 768). Following in footsteps Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai, this decision was rendered. In General Insurance Council's case, they contended that despite the directions passed in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai, there was no full and complete compliance of the same. They, therefore, approached the Supreme Court for issuing further directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. State of Kerala (2019 (5) KHC 666) considered the scope of Section 451 Cr.P.C. in the context of jewellery looted from a shop. Learned single Judge has made a reference to a passage in Basavva Kom Dyamogouda Patil (supra) wherein it has been held thus: The object and scheme of the various provisions of the Code appear to be that where the property which has been the subject-matter of an offence is seized by the police it ought not to be retained in the custody of the Court or of the police for any time longer than what is absolutely necessary. As the seizure of the property by the police amounts to a clear entrustment of the property to a Government servant, the idea is that the property should be restored to the original owner after the necessity to retain it ceases. It is manifest that there may be two stages when the property may be returned to the owner. In the first place it may be returned during any inquiry or trial. This may particularly be necessary where the property concerned is subject to speedy or natural decay. There may be other compelling reasons also which may justify the disposal of the property to the owner or otherwise in the interest of justice. The Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power vested in a criminal court under Section 451 Cr.P.C. could be sought to be invoked. For the same reason, we think that there cannot be any enumeration of straight- jacket formulae suiting all the situations. We, therefore, respectfully following the guidelines in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case frame additional points in respect of disposal of money and jewellery by invoking Section 451 Cr.P.C. We explicitly clarify that the additional points shown below are intended to supplement the guidelines in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case and not to supplant them. (i) Normally, currency notes can be returned to a claimant, if, after taking such evidence as the court deems fit in the facts and circumstances in each case, he could establish a prima facie right to get the money released. The court shall, in that event, take adequate measures to prevent the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. (ii) If, in a given case, currency note/notes happen to be a material piece of evidence, for eg., a blood stained currency note involved in a murder case, its release under Section 451 Cr.P.C. may result in destruction of evidence. In such cases, courts should be cautious to see ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
