IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39662 of 2009 1. SHAMBHU SAH @ SHAMBHU PRASAD S/O LATE RAM KRIPAL SAH R/O VILL-RAIBARI MAHUAWA, P.S- CHOUTARAWA,DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE RAM NAGAR POLICE STATION, DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN ----------- 2 19.1.2010 The petitioner’s shop was raided in a case under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and certain articles were seized from his shop. Those articles being gold and silver ornaments were put on T.I. Parade. From the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha and the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bagaha, West Champaran, it appears that the articles were put on Test Identification Parade but were not identified as stolen articles. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even according to the prosecution case the ornaments were seized from his shop and there is also no dispute with respect to the fact that the ornaments were not identified when put on T.I. Therefore, as far as the question of ownership of the seized items, there appears to be no dispute. Only difficulty which the Court may face is that the petitioner may disappear being receiving the items and as such that would hamper the prosecution case during trial. In the result I direct that the petitioner will give adequate security for release of the seized ornaments in his favour in Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 78 of 2006. The petitioner will also give an undertaking in writing that he will not see or dispose of the seized articles released in his favour and will produce the same, as and when required by the Court during trial. The petitioner will also give an 2 undertaking that he will be present on each and every date as and when required by the Court and if he absents himself even for a single date without reasonable cause, the Court may take coercive steps against him. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)