IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 296 of 2003 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.P.BUCH ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : YES to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- SONI HASMUKHBHAI KANJIBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Criminal Application No. 296 of 2003 MR MEHUL H RATHOD for Petitioner No. 1 Mr S S Patel, APP for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.P.BUCH Date of decision: 16/07/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT This is a petition filed by the petitioner-original complainant in FIR being No. C.R. No.129/2002 before Bhachau police station dated 5.8.2002 in respect of offence punishable under section 380 read with section 114 of IPC. It seems that the petitioner had filed the aforesaid FIR before the concerned police station stating that golden ornaments worth Rs. 3,34,350/- were stolen by some unknown male and female from his shop. Investigation was undertaken and certain muddamal ornaments have been seized by the Investigating Police Officer. The petitioner applied for the interim custody of the said muddamal ornaments before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhachau in Kachchh district. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said application of the petitioner by order dated 11.9.2002. The petitioner preferred Criminal Revision Application No.39/2002 unsuccessfully and hence this petition. 2. It appears that the muddamal ornaments have been seized from accused Kapila, wife of Kalidas Chhara and it appears from the records of the trial court that Kapila had agreed before the trial court that she had no objection if the muddamal ornaments are handed over to the petitioner. This fact can be gathered from the copy of the application at page no.26 at Annexure 'D' dated 11/13.8.2003. This shows that the person from whose custody the muddamal article has been seized has no objection if the muddamal ornaments are temporarily entrusted to the present petitioner. We may also consider the decision in the case of Sunderbhai A Desai v. State of Gujarat, reported in 2003 (2) GLR 1337. In view of the above decision and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and after hearing the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State and after considering the fact that accused Kapila has recorded no objection before the trial court for entrusting the muddamal ornaments to the present petitioner, this petition is allowed. Accordingly the Muddamal ornaments are ordered to be entrusted to the petitioner by way of interim custody pending hearing and disposal of the criminal case against the concerned accused person/s and subject to the ultimate decision in the said matter on following conditions: 1. The petitioner shall submit solvent surety and P.R. in a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-. 2. The petitioner shall produce the muddamal ornaments as and when required by the court concerned. 3. The petitioner shall maintain the present muddamal articles in its present position and shall not effect any change with respect to its design or otherwise. 4. The petitioner shall not part with the possession thereof and shall not dispose of the said muddamal ornaments in any manner whatsoever. 5. The trial court shall prepare panchnama in presence of a neutral Goldsmith with respect to design, weight and quality of the gold and the golden ornaments in presence of panchas. The said panchnama shall also be signed by the petitioner and accused Kapila in whose presence the panchnama may be drawn. Photographs of the ornaments shall also be taken and preserved by the court concerned for its identity. The petition is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute. [D P Buch, J.] msp