JB- ^i INTHEHIGHCCWJfi'F OE .RJDIGATURE AT BILASPUR CANT "I •• tf,s* «. RESPONDENT \ rc.G.) CMMINALREVISIONL'g^.^06 Saroj Jaishwal S/o Foolchand Jaisfawal, age about 35 years, ••."e'M'i-^-. Jaistiwal, age about 35 years; <y \^ ^^ ~'"^ Oceupation-Busines&j R/o- "'° fef SanjayNagar Colony, F'aharia, P.S. Cant Varanashi. ^tate of Ghhattisgarh. •Through P.S. Ambikapur, •Distt.- Surguja (G.G.) CMMINAL REVISIONU7S397/40fOFCQDEOFCRIMDtAL PROGEDURE XI-HC-22 7^ •-t|l''{M'sj, »Ti1u*ls, Rlcll'ay ^SSWSWSS ^.'^^^^'^t^l C}s-r2-e-<-,(.8^[Q^oi> T(!n?irw((R& -M 3II^I^[- ft-ti.i* 311^1 WqNT^f^T ^ aii^i?$iiwg)^r. 10.05.2006 Shri Neeraj Mehta, counseFfor the lippUcant. Shn Ashish Shukla, G.A. for State.] Heard onI.A. No. 902/2006 fortak|ing doeuments Qtirecord. Consideredand allbwed. ' ^ ^^. Notopppsed. . rt At the request of the coutisel for i(ie parties, tlus revision is being heard finally today, atttie stage ofadnMssioh. Heard. qni^feT^'l TTP:R?T ^ Is^ <F;Ei^.i< ^7 .SlfeTT 311^1 ^ This revision is directed against fli PXSluivastava, leamed.Sessions Judge, 3 orderdated 18.1.2006 passedbyshri Ambikapur, Distt. Suiguja in Session Trial No. 305/2004 whereby ,,&e applicajion fol release of 'Victor' mqtMcycle /' •..•••' • ' • • •'.... .•.;,.• . •:• •-.•'. I' • .• • '.•' :.' '•....• •.'•^.-' • .; . • ' '•. • bearmgNo. LlPo65 U-8009 pnSupurtnan|awasdismissed. ; I^amedcoiimel for: the appUcan^ has drawn my^^^ repon whereby it is not shown that thi conmussiatl of offence. He also argsed t] been used for fhe comnussion of the c Snpurtnama vide order dated 16.9.2004 i Judge, Ambikapur, in S.T. No. 305/2004 order dated 16.1ft2fl04 wluchwastake^onrecord. It was argued:that the impugned order is^ contrary to fhe dtctun AmbctlalDesai Vs. State afGnjratwpwtt^&m 2002 AIRSCW 5301 wherein it washeldthatpowersnh<lerSection451C^ andjudieiously and the seized articles sho^ldiiot be kept IdcKedfcir a longtime in a police station, in any case, for more thati 15 days t6 one tnonth. Qn flie offier s' aforesaid vehicle was used foi the lat fhe 'Bolero' Vehicle aBeged to hawe ffence has already bega released on lassed by ttie First Additional Session He also relied upon and placed tfae laid bv flie Apex Court in Sanderia/ .P.e; should be exercised expeditiously J{T?^I^E^g^' '2- fl ?S5 XI-HC-22 .sii^rqn, R.-tt*i 3T§W ^T( <ii$a •k-. ;'-' Priyra 'I T^ -<<iiiM<i,a>Ti1wis, (•icii'yy. t|l»Ta:fc9h*<iq) 0(- -&•£•/•t^'y^. t^-e1' 200 hand, Shri Ashish Shukla, counsel i applieation. ' Having considered tKe rfval coi repprt 3oes not show fhat the aforesaid of t&e crime and that die 'Bolero'>v< :''. • ^ conrinissiDn o£offM)iae,,jmsalisady^l&eeji prayerforreleasiftgttieWictor'moTo^ contrary to law'and deserves td be Junsdictlon. In the result, tlus revision is a] fumishes a personal bond for Rs. 5Q,| amouht to the saiisfaction of-Ae biall 'Victor' motorcycle bearing No. UP 06[ ofttte appKcant upon the follo^ving eon|ditions. A/ Tliat the appUcant shall| B/ G/ D/ the motdreycle. Thatttieapplicautshall veyde even teniporMil^ That tfae coloured aid in ite identification before retuming it on Si^purtnama -^ chi<ii?T<R^[ *ll*l<rtr'^Tst<iTTf^R^lt ^siNiiaii^t - appeiBFmg for the Sfate opposed the ttentioris ahdlhe submission Ihat fhe fmal 1/ehicle was used in comnussion ofoffence |iucle -all^ged tcyhave^been .usett in the releBsed ori Supurtnama, rejection oflhe ^cle onSiqiurtnamaofNowiierisclearly it asi3e in Ae exercise of the revisional lowed. B is ordered fhat if the applicant OOO/- alorig wilfa a sotvent surety in like Gourt, Ambikapur, tfae seized motoroyple U-8009 shallbe retumedon SupUrtafltna not in any inanner alter the appearance of otlransfa ordeliverfhe possessjon ofthe to aiyotherpersQa. phofijigraphs of Ihe motorcycle so as to clearly ihall be taken at the cost of Ifae applicant That the applicant 8haU| before ffie toial Court du|ring evidence produce (he vehicle as and when required' •< Sd-/' Judge J[TT^ ^Ra^ .'/"