1 cr-wp-2734-09 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.W.P. NO. 2734 OF 2009 Parasmal Babulal Jain ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent .... Mr. Abhaykumar Apte Adv. for petitioner Mr. V.B.Konde-Deshmukh APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 13, 2010 P.C.: 1 Leave to amend granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2 Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner-original complainant and the learned APP for the State. Mr. S.B.Hirnaik, Police Naik/5691 is present in Court. 3 On 22.2.2002 some persons entered into the house of the petitioner and committed robbery of various gold ornaments. In the process of committing robbery, the wife of the petitioner came to be 2 cr-wp-2734-09 murdered, hence, he lodged FIR. The petitioner is first informant in C.R. No.I-26 of 2002 of Kolse Wadi Police Station, Kalyan. It is under Sections 302, 394, 397 and 452 of IPC. The petitioner who is the complainant, is seeking the return of property i.e. gold ornaments which came to be robbed from his residence on 22.2.2002. 4 The petitioner had also preferred application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Kalyan for return of property i.e. 172 items of gold valued at Rs.2,40,000/-. However, the said application came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner may not be able to produce the property in the Court when required in the trial. It is to be noted that in the said application, the accused was heard. He has not claimed the property. As the petitioner is the original complainant and admittedly the property has been robbed from his residence, the Investigating Agency does not have any objection to the return of the gold ornaments to petitioner. In this view of the matter, during the pendency of the trial the property i.e. gold ornaments be returned to the complainant on the following conditions: (1) Petitioner-Complainant to furnish personal bond of Rs. 2,40,000/- before the trial Court. (2) Petitioner to furnish an undertaking before the trial Court that he will not melt the ornaments and will retain them in the same condition 3 cr-wp-2734-09 and will produce the same before the trial Court as and when required. (3) Furnishing of undertaking is a condition precedent to the return of the property. (4) The learned APP states that the Investigating Agency will make an inventory of the said ornaments. The learned advocate for the applicant states that he will go to the Police Station and take out the photographs of the said ornaments and copies of photos will be furnished to the Investigating Agency and the Court and one set will remain with the complainant. (5) In view of above facts, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) on above conditions. (6) At the end of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge shall pass appropriate order in respect of the said property. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]