IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.895 of 2006 NARESH SHARMA Versus KRISHNA PRASAD & ORS ----------- 5 27.8.2008 This revision application has been filed against the order dated 29.6.2006 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City in Didarganj P.S. Case No.31/2006 thereby the seized aluminum wire worth Rs.1.70 lacs has been directed to be released in favour of opposite party nos. 1 and 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aluminum wire is the most important material ext. in order to prove the prosecution story. If the aluminum wire is released in favour of accused opposite parties, they shall convert the same in their own use, as a result of which the entire prosecution case shall fail. However, on perusal of the impugned order it appears that the article in question has been released in favour of opposite party nos. 1 and 2 on execution of indemnity bond of Rs.2, 00000/- with two sureties of the like amount and also with further direction to produce the same when they are so directed by the court below. In view of above direction and conditions imposed by the court below I am of the view that no case is made out for interference in the impugned order by this Court. This revision application is accordingly dismissed. B.Jha (Ghanshyam Prasad)