JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Gupta, J. The petitioner has approached this Court invoking its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution in challenging the order dated 25/3/2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi whereby, the application of the petitioner for release of mobile phone and laptop, seized in connection with crime case no. 483 of 2014 under Sections 419, 420, 406 IPC, police station Sigra, Varanasi, has been rejected as well as the order dated 5/5/2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4 Varanasi dismissing the revision and thereby affirming the order passed by the learned Magistrate. 2. The revisional court has held the mobile phone and laptop are case properties. It has been noted that the aforesaid properties were seized in relation to commission of offence by the petitioner under sections 419, 420, 406 IPC. The first information report was lodged on an information given by Km. Iti Mishra and others according to which, the petitioner used his mobile phone in calling the complainants to appear in Muslim Inter College, Lallapura, Varanasi in connection with their employment as Anganvari Karyakarti. The petitioner asked them to deposit Rs.1000/- each, but no receipt was issued. It later transpired that the petitioner is an imposter and had collected money from large number of persons, by giving a false assurance regarding their employment. It has been noted that the entire evidence in relation to the calls made to the victim as well as their ID proof and other details are available on the mobile phone and the laptop. The revisional court has thus, held that in case the mobile phone and laptop are given in the custody of the petitioner, it will result in destruction of material piece of evidence and thus, would prejudicially affect the trial. 3. This Court does not find any illegality in the view taken by the courts below in refusing to release the mobile phone and laptop to the petitioner. The petition lacks merit and is dismissed.