Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1670 (RAJ)

Pramod Vyas v. State of Rajasthan

2018-08-08

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2018
JUDGMENT Vijay Bishnoi, J. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 10.05.2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter to be referred as 'the trial court') in CR No.249/2017 of Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jodhpur City East, whereby the trial court has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner with a prayer for releasing silver ornaments, seized from the accused persons in connection with the FIR No.36/2018 of Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jodhpur City East. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a complaint at Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jodhpur City East while contending that two persons viz. Jitu Bhati and Ashok Bhati duped him. It is alleged by the petitioner that they contacted him on mobile phone and told him that you sent 15 kg. of pure silver to their shop viz. Majisa Jewelers, Jodhpur and they assured him that after getting pure silver from other sources, they would settle the account. It is alleged by the petitioner that he, through his employee viz. Naresh Joshi, sent 12kg. and 303gm. of pure silver to Majisa Jewelers, Jodhpur, where Jitu Bhati and Ashok Bhati delivered him around 20kg. of raw silver. It is alleged that when the said raw silver was examined by Sriji Buliyann Refinery, it was found to be spurious silver. It is alleged by the petitioner that accused persons viz. Jitu Bhati and Ashok Bhati misappropriated pure silver of him by delivering spurious silver to him. 3. On receiving the aforesaid complaint by the petitioner, the FIR No.36/2018 was registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jodhpur City East and thereafter the police started investigation and during the course of investigation, the police recovered certain silver ornaments from the accused persons while claiming that the said ornaments were prepared from pure silver given by the petitioner to the accused persons. The police prepared three seizure memos, whereby silver ornaments were recovered. The silver ornaments seized through Seizure Form No.1 were identified by one complainant Chandanmal Soni, another articles seized through Seizure Form No.2 were identified by another complainant Manohar Lal Soni and some of the silver ornaments seized through Seizure Form No.3 were identified by the petitioner. 4. The police prepared three seizure memos, whereby silver ornaments were recovered. The silver ornaments seized through Seizure Form No.1 were identified by one complainant Chandanmal Soni, another articles seized through Seizure Form No.2 were identified by another complainant Manohar Lal Soni and some of the silver ornaments seized through Seizure Form No.3 were identified by the petitioner. 4. The applications, preferred on behalf of the petitioner and two other complainants, have been rejected by the concerned Judicial Magistrate on the grounds that the investigation is going on and the final report has not been submitted by the police. It is also observed that there is variance between quantity of silver mentioned in the above referred FIR and the articles recovered by the police during the course of investigation, therefore, the applications preferred by the petitioner and other complainants are not liable to be granted. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that so far as recovered ornaments is concerned, it is clear that all three complainants are identified their ornaments separately and, therefore, there is no difficulty in handing over the seized silver ornaments separately to them. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the investigation into the above referred FIR has already been completed and police have filed chargesheet against accused persons, therefore, it is a fit case wherein a direction can be issued to the trial court to release seized silver ornaments belonging to the petitioner on supardaginaman. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2003) AIR SC 638. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor has supported the order passed by the trial court and argued that there is no illegality in the same, hence, no interference is called for. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 9. It is not in dispute that investigation into the above referred FIR has already been concluded and charge-sheet has also been filed. The petitioner has identified silver ornaments recovered by the police in one of the seizure form. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case has held that with regard to valuable articles, such as, golden or silver ornaments, it is of no use to keep such articles in police custody for years till the trial is over. 11. The petitioner has identified silver ornaments recovered by the police in one of the seizure form. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case has held that with regard to valuable articles, such as, golden or silver ornaments, it is of no use to keep such articles in police custody for years till the trial is over. 11. Hon'ble Supreme Court has opined that in such cases Magistrate should pass appropriate order under the provisions of Cr.P.C. at the earliest. 12. Taking guidance from the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai's case this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.05.2018 passed by the trial court is set aside and the trial court is directed to release only those silver ornaments seized in FIR No.36/2018 of Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jodhpur City East, which are identified by the petitioner in one of the seizure form, on supardaginaman to the petitioner on the conditions, which the trial court deems proper to its satisfaction.