Judgment : 1. The present petitioners along with the three others were placed on trial in T.R. Case No. 60 of 1996 before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas. In the said trial by a judgement and order passed on 28th February, 2007 while the learned Trial Court convicted the accused, Mihir Kumar Chakraborty but acquitted the remaining three accused including the present petitioner. The learned Trial Court further directed that all the articles seized from the possession of the present petitioner be returned to her after the expiry of the period of appeal. In the meanwhile the convict, Mihir Kumar Chakraborty, preferred an appeal before the Learned Sessions Judge, Alipore, South 24-Parganas, the complainant company in two separate criminal revisions challenged before the self same Court, the order of acquittal of the accused, B.S. Chanda Ramani as well as the order of acquittal of the convict, Mihir Kumar Chakraborty so far as the charge under Sections 467/468/471/477 of the Indian Penal Code are concerned and for enhancement of his sentence for his conviction under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. It would be worthwhile to note that the said order whereby the present petitioner was acquitted and the articles seized from her possession were directed to be returned to her was never challenged before any higher forum and the same has already reached its finality. 2. While the aforesaid appeal as well as the criminal revisions were still pending for disposal before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 1st Court, Alipore, South 24-Parganas, the petitioner moved a criminal revision being C.R.R. No. 4434 of 2007 praying for direction upon the Court below for passing necessary order for return of the seized articles in terms of the order passed by the Trial Court. When the aforesaid criminal revision was disposed of on 28th of February, 2008, and this Court made the following orders; “Hence, while the aforesaid order dated July 2, 2007 passed in connection with T.R. Case No. 60 of 1996 by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore is not interfered with, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, First Court, Alipore before whom the appeal against the conviction of the accused, Mihir Chakraborty and the revision against the order of acquittal of B. S. Chandi Ramani and Mihir Chakraborty, arising out of the judgement and order dated February 28, 2006 passed in connection with T.R. Case No. 60 of 1996 by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas is pending, is hereby directed to forward the records relating to the T.R. No. 60 of 1996 to the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas immediately after the argument in the aforesaid appeal and criminal revisions are over and the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas before whom the petitioner’s said application for return of seized articles is pending is directed to dispose of the said application within 5 days from the date of receipt of such records in accordance with law and after hearing the parties thereto. The Learned Magistrate is further directed immediately after disposal of the said application to send back the said records to the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, First Court, Alipore, South 24- Parganas where the aforesaid appeal and revisions are pending.” 3. It now appears from the certified copy of the order passed in connection with the aforesaid criminal appeal that the said appeal is still pending for disposal in the Court of the Learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, First Court, Alipore and the argument is not still over, although more than two years have been elapsed from the date of passing of the aforesaid order by this Court. It further appears that the concerned appellate Court is lying vacant and next date July 30, 2010 has been fixed for hearing of argument. 4. It further appears that the concerned appellate Court is lying vacant and next date July 30, 2010 has been fixed for hearing of argument. 4. Therefore, it appears although the trial was concluded in February 2007 and there was a direction for return of the seized articles to the petitioner and said order was never challenged before any higher Court, still even after expiry of more than two years, the seized articles has not been returned to the petitioner which is not at all justified and lawful. 5. In such circumstances, the Learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, First Court, Alipore before whom the Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2007 is pending is directed to send the records of the case to the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, South 24-Pargans before whom the petitioner’s application for return of seized articles are pending within four days from the date of receipt of this order and the Learned Magistrate is directed to immediately after receipt of the records to dispose of the petitioner’s application for return of the seized articles in accordance with law and after hearing the parties within a week thereafter. It is further directed that after disposal of the petitioner’s application for return of seized articles, the records at once be sent to the Court of the Learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, First Court, Alipore, South 24-Parganas before whom Criminal appeal No. 18 of 2007 is pending. The Learned Registrar General of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Court below through the Learned Sessions Judge, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South), who in turn shall apprise the purports of this order to the Court concerned so that in future there may not be any chance of disobedience of this order by the Court below at the risk of any legal consequences. This criminal revisional application is, thus, disposed of. Criminal Section is directed to deliver urgent Photostat certified copy of this Judgement to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.