IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.382 of 2010 MANORANJAN PRASAD SINGH, S/O LATE BAIDYANATH SINGH, MOHALLA SALEMPUR, CHAPRA TOWN, SARAN. Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRU.C.B.I. ----------- 9. 18.11.2010. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for commanding the respondents to return the document seized from the possession of the petitioner in R.C. No.-17 (A) of 2002. The petitioner has further prayed for commanding the respondent to comply the earlier direction dated 15.03.2005 for return of documents, which the C.B.I. has unnecessary tagged now with R.C. No.01 (A)/ of 2003. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier C.B.I. registered R.C. No. 17(A)/2002 under Sections 120(B) and 420 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on 07.10.2002. He further submits that in course of investigation several documents were seized by the C.B.I. However, after investigation, the C.B.I. submitted final form in the court of Special Judge, Patna 25.02.2005 with the finding that “No substantial evidence has come on record to prove the allegation against the suspect in the Court of law”. The learned Special Judge, Patna accepted the final form and directed the C.B.I. to return the seized document to the petitioner vide order dated 15.03.2005. However, the C.B.I. did not return the seized documents to the petitioner. The petitioner as such filed another petition on 20.03.2009 for release of the documents seized in R.C. No. 17(A) of 2 2002 as ordered earlier on 15.3.2005. it is relevant to state that C.B.I. instituted another case bearing RC 01(A) of 2003 under Sections 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for acquiring properties disproportionate to the known source of income of the petitioner and charge-sheet has also been submitted in this case. Counsel for the C.B.I. states that only those documents are being retained, which are relevant for being exhibited in RC 01(A) of 2003. Counsel for the petitioner states that a bunch of sale deed contained from page no.1 – 191 (Memorandum of seizure list dated 10.10.2002) bearing serial no.5 of the seizure of R.C. no. 17 (A) of 2002 are important documents for the purpose of deciding family dispute, which is pending between the parties in Civil Court at Chapra be released. He further submits that most of these documents such as sale deeds are prior to the date of his joining of his service as such these documents could not be relevant for RC 01 (A) of 2003 or any case arising during his service tenure. He also prays for return of three STDRs bearing no. 650221, 651673 and 459692, which have all matured. The petitioner also prays for return of Kisan Vikas Patras being 21 in number. This Court is of the view that all the STDRs and Kisan Vikas Patra, which have matured be returned to the petitioner for its renewal. The petitioner would give an undertaking that he would deposit the STDR and Kisan Vikas Patra soon after its renewal. Thereafter it will be open for the petitioner to file a fresh petition for release of these documents, which would be considered on its own 3 merit. So far as the release of sale deeds are concerned, this Court observes that if petitioner files a petition for release of the same and sale deeds in question are of the year prior to joining of the petitioner in service, the trial court would consider the desirability of releasing the same in favour of the petitioner with an undertaking that he will produce the same as and when required during the trial of the case. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. Shashi (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)