Madhya Pradesh High Court
Aashish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 September, 2021
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
(S.B.: HON. SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA)
M.Cr.C. No. 19619/2021
Aashish
Vs.
State of MP & Ors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Yogesh Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Harshalata Soni learned P.L.for the respondent/State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether approved for reporting :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(Passed on 13/09/2021) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by order dated 9.1.2021 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class Indore in the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 read with section 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter mentioned as Cr.P.C.) whereby the prayer to release the seized articles on supurdaginama to the petitioner has been rejected. 2/ Facts of the case in nutshell are that on 27.3.2020 the petitioner residing at Indore, went to Guna with his family and on account of lockdown he could not return back to Indore. On 3.6.2020 the petitioner received phone call from his neighbour that the main lock of his house has been broken. On receiving said information petitioner with great difficulty reached at Indore and saw that his household items are scattered and the almirah was 2 broke down and some ornaments and other articles were stolen. The petitioner reported the incident to the police and on that basis FIR being crime no. 392/2020 has been registered against the unknown person. During investigation police arrested accused persons and seized three pairs of silver anklets from possession of accused Deepak, 8 pairs of toe rings, from possession of accused Nilesh, one golden ring, one golden pair of ear tops, one golden chain and two golden rings from possession of accused Roshan. 3/ The petitioner/complainant filed an application under Section 451 r/w 457 of Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate First class Indore for releasing the seized articles on supurdagi to the petitioner. In the meanwhile another person namely Aman soni also filed separate application with similar prayer. After hearing both the parties, the learned JMFC dismissed both the applications by the impugned order dated 9.1.2021 by observing that there are so many contradictory statements made by the parties in respect of title of stolen articles. On being aggrieved by the aforementioned order, the petitioner preferred Criminal revision No. 19/21 before the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge Indore was also dismissed by the learned Sessions Court by observing that the revision is not maintainable against order passed under Section 451 & 457 of Cr.P.C.
4/ Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the articles are belonging to petitioner and are used by family members and are old articles hence no document was available with the petitioner. The petitioner identified the said articles in the test identification parade of seized articles. The said articles which were seized from the possession of accused persons/respondents no. 2,3 & 4, belong to the present petitioner. He also submits that both the courts below 3 committed an error in not considering the fact that respondent no. 5 has no locus standi to prefer the application under Section 451 r/w section 457 of Cr.P.C. He further contended that the impugned order is contrary to law and facts and it deserves to be set aside. 5/ Learned counsel for the respondent/State on the other hand has supported the impugned order and has submitted that the order passed by learned JMFC does not suffer from any illegality and therefore, may not be interfered with.
6/ I have carefully considered the rival contentions raised by both the parties and also perused the case diary and the material placed on record.
7/ The learned court below has rejected the application filed under section 451 & 457 of Cr.P.C. on the basis that present petitioner and another applicant Aman Soni both are seeking similar prayer, but there are so many contradictions in respect of title of stolen articles and no title document has been submitted by any of the party.
8/ The petitioner has also assailed the impugned order dated 9.1.2021 passed by learned JMFC before the learned 7 th Additional sessions Judge by filing criminal Revision No. 19/2021 which was also dismissed by the sessions Judge by observing that the order passed on application under Section 451 read with section 457 Cr.P.C. for supurdagi is an interlocutory order and therefore, as per provisions of Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C. the revision is not maintainable. But petitioner has not challenged the order of learned Sessions Court in this petition. However, present petitioner and Aman Soni both are claiming seized articles on the basis of their title. Seized articles are subject matter of evidence, therefore, the title of the seized articles needs to be proved by all the parties by 4 leading cogent evidence before the trial court, therefore, the said plea cannot be determined by this Court at this pre-trial stage. 9/ Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned JMFC has not committed any error in rejecting the application filed by petitioner under section 451 read with section 457 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, no reason for interference in the impugned order is called for.
Thus the petition filed by petitioner under section 482 of Cr.P.C being devoid of any merit deserves to be and is hereby accordingly dismissed.
(Anil Verma) Judge BDJ Digitally signed by BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Date: 2021.09.14 10:44:56 +05'30'