The State Of Madras Represented By The ... vs T. Raman And Anr. on 25 April, 1968
Further, in Jaganath Hazarimal Firm v. State of Bombay , a Bench of the Bombay High Court has taken the view that an order under Section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code only concludes immediate right to possessions, but does not conclude the right or title of any person to the ownership of the property and the real owner may proceed against the holder of the articles-and it cannot be said that there is any necessity of having that order set aside. In view of these decisions and on the general principle that a Magistrate, while he passes an order under Section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code, does not decide the question of title and he is merely concerned with deciding the right to immediate possession of the goods, I hold that the present suit of the plaintiff to recover possession of the articles is not barred by any principle of law and consequently the suit as such was maintainable.