Cr. Revision No.54/2009 4.06.2009 Present: Mr. N.K. Tomar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General for the respondent. Heard and gone through the record. This revision, under Sections 397 and 401 Cr. P.C. is directed against the order dated 17.2.2009, passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rajgarh, whereby petitioner’s application, under Section 457 Cr. P.C for release of timber, seized in case FIR No.93 of 2004, has been rejected and he has been directed to get his title, to the timber, decided from a Civil Court. Certain timber was seized by the police officials from the residence of the present applicant. His son and a tenant were made accused. Allegation that was made against them was that they had kept the timber at their place without any permit in their favour. Also the allegation of theft was made against them. During the course of investigation, permits were produced, in respect of the seized timber, and on examining those permits, case was submitted to the Court for cancellation. The Judicial Magistrate accepted the cancellation report and cancelled the FIR. Thereafter, the present applicant, claiming himself to be the owner of the timber, on the strength of the aforesaid permits, filed an application, under Section 457 Cr. P.C. Learned Magistrate examined those permits and felt that the same were of suspicious nature. He has, therefore, directed the petitioner to get his title, to the timber, decided from a Civil Court. It is against this order of the Judicial Magistrate that the present revision petition is directed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Advocate General for the respondent. - 2 - From the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that probably the Magistrate did not have before her the record of the case that was registered against a son and a tenant of the petitioner, vide FIR No.93 of 2004. I have been told that during the course of investigation of that case, statements of forest officers/officials had been recorded to the effect that the timber was not illicit and permit had been issued, in respect of the said timber, in favour of the present petitioner. I am of the considered view that the learned Judicial Magistrate ought to have looked into the record of the aforesaid case, i.e. FIR No.93 of 2004, before directing the petitioner to get his title to the timber determined from a Civil Court. Consequently, present petition is allowed and the order of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rajgarh, dated 17.2.2009, is set aside and the case, i.e. Application under Section 457 Cr. P.C. is remanded to the learned Judicial Magistrate with a direction to decide the same afresh, in the light of observations made hereinabove. Revision Petition stands disposed of. June 4, 2009(ss) (Surjit Singh), J.