JUDGMENT 1. - This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge, Partapgarh with a recommendation that the order passed by the Asstt. Collector & Magistrate First Class, Rawat Bhatta, respecting the delivery of 439 bags of Jowar to Satya Narain upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- and a surety in the like amount may be set aside. 2. The grounds on which the reference has been made is that the Asstt. Collector & Magistrate 1st Class, Rawat Bhatta was not empowered to exercise the powers of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Begun, and that he passed the impugned order in the capacity of Sub Divisional Magistrate, inspite of the fact that he was not appointed on the post of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Begun. 3. I have heard Mr. B. Advani appearing on behalf of Satya Narain under the Legal Aid Programme, and Dr. S. S. Bhar.dawat for the State. In my opinion the reference is devoid of substance because the impugned order respecting the delivery of Jowar was passed on 15. 1. 74 under Section 523 old Cr. P. C. Under Section 523 the Asstt. Collector & Magistrate First Class Rawat Bhatta was empowered either to deliver the property seized by the police to a person entitled to its possession or to pass such order as he thought fit respecting its disposal. The seizure of the bags of Jowar by the Police was reported in writing on 15-1-74 by the Deputy Superintendent of Police to the Collector & Magistrate First Class Rawat Bhatta who was on that day directed by the District Magistrate Chittorgarh to look after the work of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Begun, in addition to his own duties. Hence it cannot be said that the learned Magistrate First Class Rawat Bhatta had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. All that Section 523 Old Cr. P. C. requires was that the seizure by any police officer of the property taken under section 51 Cr. P. C. or alleged or suspected to have been stolen or found under circumstances which raised suspicion of commission of any offence must be forthwith reported to a Magistrate. This section no where lays down that the seizure of property shall be reported to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence which was alleged to have been committed in respect there of. This section no where lays down that the seizure of property shall be reported to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence which was alleged to have been committed in respect there of. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Begun no doubt had jurisdiction to try offence alleged to have been committed by the non-petitioner in respect of property seized but this fact did not take away the jurisdiction of Asstt. Collector & Magistrate First Class Rawat Bhatta to pass an order respecting the delivery or disposal of the property seized in this case, especially when the seizure was reported to him when he was looking after the Work of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Begun, as per directions of the District Magistrate, Chittorgarh. 4. In this view of the matter, I cannot persuade myself to agree with the order of the Sessions Judge, Partapgarh, that the Assistant Collector and Magistrate First Class Rawat Bhatta, was invested with no power to pass an order under section 523, old Cr. P. C. 5. Another ground on which reference has been made is that the learned Magistrate wrongly ordered to deliver 439 bags of Jawar to Satyanarain, because Satyanarain never requested for obtaining delivery of 439 bags but, on the other hand, he requested the learned Magistrate to deliver 89 bags only to him. I have considered the above ground. It is not well founded. The contents of the personal bond furnished by Satyanarain clearly reveal that the entire 439 b3gs of Jowar found in 5 trucks were delivered to Satyanarain upon his furnishing a personal bond in the amount of Rs. 50,000/ - , together with one surety in the like amount. The record further reveals that Suraj Mai furnished a surety bond for Rs. 50,000 which was duly verified by the Magistrate on 10. 2. 1974. In support of his financial position Suraj Mai put in his own affidavit on stamp paper duly attested by Notary Public, Kota. When the personal bond as well as the surety bonds were furnished by Satyanarain and his surety, the learned Magistrate passed an order on 10. 2. 1974, that 439 bags of Jowar contained in 5 trucks be delivered on Superdnama to Satyanarain. The order is on the record. 6. Consequently, the reference has no force and is hereby rejected. *******