1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B.CRIMINAL MISC.PETITION NO.294/2001 (Satya Narain Vs. State of Raj. ) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. ***** DATE OF ORDER : 17th APRIL,2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.P.PATHAK Mr.Lokesh Sharma, for the petitioner Mr.N.R.Saran, Public Prosecutor BY THE COURT: This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 29the June, 1999 in Sessions Case No.49/85 whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Ajmer rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 452 Cr.P.C. to hand over 63 gms gold which was initially at the time of dacoity in the shape of ornaments and subsequently after melting the ornaments it converted into gold substance. Briefly stated the facts giving rise for disposal of this petition are that in the Sessions Case No.49/85 trial was held by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Ajmer where offences were under sections 395, 397, 398, 120-B, 307/149, 324/149 and 412 I.P.C. After trial, the accused were acquitted vide judgment dated 29the August, 1988. At the time of deciding the 2 case in relation to the property recovered gold ornaments etc., it was ordered that since trial was to be held against other co- accused, who were absconding and against them warrants were issued, therefore, it was not legally permissible for the court to pass any order in relation to the gold which the petitioner claims to be his. The application was rejected. Hence this petition has been filed. It has been contended by the learned counsel that during the course of investigation a false recovery memo Ex.P8 was prepared on 3rd July, 1981 and since no body has claimed the property and the case in which the gold ornaments were seized has already resulted in acquittal and matter relates to an incident, which took place in the year 1981, the petitioner has waited for nearly 30 years, now, at least a proper order is required to be passed. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions. I have carefully considered the submissions made before me. The facts of the case reveals that in relation to an incident of 1981 a trial took place and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Ajmer after trial acquitted the accused but declined delivery of the gold, which is claimed by the petitioner, on the ground that some of the accused were absconding. It is correct that some of the accused absconded and trial was held in relation to other accused. Now, nearly 30 years have elapsed and it is not as yet known as to what has happened to other 3 accused persons and in relation to the recovery of the god weighing 63 gms. the witnesses could not prove the recovery and petitioner as a witness (P.W.13) has deposed that the ornaments were of his wife and that aspect of the matter was not disputed. It also appears that since the property has not been claimed by any other person and no useful purpose will be served keeping in custody of the court 63 gms. gold for indefinite period, I deem it proper to allow the petition moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In the result, the petition is allowed and the order dated 29th June, 1999 passed by the trial court is set aside. The trial court is directed to deliver 63 gms. gold which was seized during the course of investigation through Ex.P8 to the petitioner on filing supardginama on following conditions:- (1) that he shall execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court; (2) that he shall produce a photograph of the 63 gms. gold substance before the trial Court; (3) that he shall produce the 63 gms. gold substance as and when required by the court; (S.P.PATHAK) J. BKS/-