IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4891 of 2010() ------------------------- CMP.10417/2010 IN CRIME NO.117/2010 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PALA .................... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: --------------- SOHAN BANAVATH, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN BANAVATH, GAMAPATHI NIVAS, SANGEETHAVADY, DOMBIVALI WEST, THANA, MAHARASHTRA. BY ADV. SRI.P.BABU KUMAR SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. CRIME BRANCH CID, ECONOMIC OFFIENCE WING-II, KOTTAYAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J.MOHAMED ANZARI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4891 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.117 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pala for offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner was released on bail. He applied for release of certain articles seized from him at the time of arrest. According to the petitioner those articles are not in any way connected with the offences alleged. Petitioner filed C.M.P.No.10417 of 2010 for return of the said articles. It was opposed by the Investigating Officer. Learned Magistrate has ordered return of the mobile phone (after retaining the Sim card in court) and the watch but, refused to return the gold ornament and cash accepting objection of the Investigating Officer. That order is under challenge. Learned counsel submits that the gold ring seized from petitioner is his wedding ring and that it is not in any way connected with the offence alleged. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that petitioner is involved in five other cases also and that Investigating Officer has reason to suspect that gold ornament and cash are involved in those cases, gold ornament having been purchased with the money involved in those cases. 2. In view of objection of the Investigating Officer which cannot be said to be without merit, I do not find reason to interfere with the order of the learned Magistrate refusing to return the gold ornament and cash at this stage of Crl.M.C.No.4891/2010 2 the proceeding. But, I make it clear that if at a later point of time circumstances warranted, it is open to the petitioner to move fresh application for return of those articles which are not returned, in the court below notwithstanding the order in this proceeding. Petition is disposed of as above. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks