( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No.109 of 2008 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No.478 of 2004 Jayesh B. Chandnani .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr Anand Kumar with D.A. Jehangir, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr S. R. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. DATED : 08.04.2008. DATED : 08.04.2008. DATED : 08.04.2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. The applicant has taken out this application seeking permission to open container containing seized property, one week before the auction in presence of the Court representative and to take out some packs and/or bottles of the products contained therein for being shown to the prospective bidders. 2. The factual matrix is not in dispute that the learned Single Judge of this Court ( 2 ) (Shri.Kanade,J) on 20.4.2005 directed that the goods be sold by public auction after getting Chemical Analyser’s report. The said auction was to be monitored by the learned Trial Judge. Thereafter, by an order dated 7.4.2006 the said order was modified giving option to sell the goods by publishing public advertisement in the News-papers at the cost of the applicant subject to the condition that goods shall be sold for industrial use only. 3. The applicant has advertised sale of these goods in the newspapers. The intending purchasers wished to examine the goods before they could offer their respective bids. The applicant applied to the learned Judicial Magistrate vide application No. 305 of 2006 and prayed that the bidders be permitted to examine sample of the goods to be sold. However, the said prayer was rejected by the learned Magistrate. In the backdrop of these facts the present applicant has moved this application with a prayer indicated in the opening part of this order. ( 3 ) 4. Having heard both parties, hardly there is any contest to the prayer made. In the circumstances, it is directed that two to four sealed packs/bottles of each product may be removed from the big container for being used as representative sample of the respective products for being shown to the intending buyers. The containers minus the bottles of each product removed should be sealed and kept in proper custody under the orders of the Trial Court. Such few packs and/or bottles of each product removed from the container for being used as a representative sample, may be used for being shown to the intending buyers. 5. In the result, Application No. 109 of 2008 stands allowed in the above terms. (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J) (V.C.DAGA,J)