1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Pradeep Gupta Versus State of Rajasthan S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1565/2007 against the Order dated 27.9.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh, district Srigangangar. Date of Order : 11/03/2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Niranjan Singh for the petitioner Mr. Narendra Moolchandani, public prosecutor for the State. BY THE COURT:- By the instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.9.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter) in FIR No.610/2007 Police Station-Suratgarh, district Sri Ganganagar, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. seeking interim custody of the 204 bags of mustard subject matter of the theft. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the theft has been committed from the warehouse of the Total Lojestic India Pvt. Limited of which the present petitioner is the Manager (Operation). It is further contended that the first information report was lodged by the employee of the Total Lojestic India Pvt. Limited regarding the theft of the mustard from the warehouse, upon which, the police recovered as many as 204 bags mustard weighing 13 tonnes from various persons. Even before the trial court except the petitioner no one has claimed the possession and ownership of the said mustard. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on close scrutiny of the order impugned, in my view, the trial court fell in error in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner when no one except the petitioner has claimed the possession and ownership as also the mustard has been seized by the police on the report of theft lodged by the petitioner Total Lojestic India Pvt. Limited, however, in the order impugned it nowhere appears that at the time of deciding the application, the accused from whose possession the mustard has been recovered has been heard by the trial court. In my view, a person from whose possession, the article is recovered deserves to be given an opportunity of hearing as to whether he has any claim to the recovered article. In this view of the matter, the criminal misc. petition 3 is allowed. The order impugned dated 27.9.2007 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial court to decide afresh after hearing the petitioner and the person from whose possession the mustard in question has been recovered by the police. (H.R.PANWAR),J. rp 4 S.B.Cr. Misc. Stay Petition No. 1051/2007 In S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 1565/2007 (Pradeep Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of order : 11.03.2008 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J. Mr. Niranjan Singh for the petitioner. Mr. Narendra Moolchandani, P.P. Since the criminal misc. petition itself has been allowed, the stay petition stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp