9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (8) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maining three accused and they were held guilty and sentenced by he judgment dated 28-3-1981. The learned Magistrate heard the parties regarding the disposal of the property. The learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor prayed that the articles recovered during the course of investigation may be returned to the complainant. On the other hand on 11-3-1982, an application under Section 110 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the Customs Department for disposal according to the provisions of the Act and be not returned to the complainant. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties and looking to the material produced on behalf of the complainant rejected the application filed by the Customs Department and ordered that the recovered gold may be returned to the complainant with a further order that in case Customs Department considers it necessary, separate proceedings in that regards may be initiated. It is in grievance to that order for the disposal of the gold involved in the case that the Union of India has come to this Court for relief under Section 482 Cr. P.C. read with Section 392 Cr. P.C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Court or and to secure the ends of justice. The principle enunciated in that case was that, in case the impugned order clearly brings about a situation which is an abuse of process of the Court or for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, interference by the High Court is absolutely necessary. 7. In the case of Ganesh Nand Chela v. Swami Dayanand, 1980 Cr. L.J. 1036, the question arose in Delhi High Court as to whether a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the complaint without filing revision against an order summoning the petitioner to stand for trial was permissible or not. In view of the finding that the cognizance offence being against mandatory provisions of the Code was illegal. His Lordships was pleased to quash the impugned order in exercise of the powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. 8. In the case of Raj Kapoor and others v. State (Delhi Administration) and others, A.I.R. 1980 SC 258, their Lordships were pleased to propound that, the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr. P.C. does not stand repelled when the revisional power under Section 397 overlaps. It was further observed that, nothing in the Code, not even Section 39 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the formalities necessary for that purpose the possession of the gold by the complainant would amount to an offence. On the other hand, the contention of the learned counsel for the non-petitioner No. 2 is that the trial Court has passed the impugned order after looking into various documents, such as declaration by the complainant; the conversion of ornaments into the throne (Sinhasan) of the deity alongwith the receipt of the goldsmith. The list filed in the Income Tax Department, in 1974 describing the ornaments melted for the throne and taking into consideration the fact that in the Income Tax return for the year 1975-76 the factum of theft was mentioned and, therefore, there can be no hurdle in the way of the non-petitioner keeping the gold with her. Section 110 of the Act read as under : Procedure in respect of Gold sized by the Police Officers. - (1) Where any Police Officer seizes any gold which is alleged or suspected to have been stolen or which is found under circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of an offence, such Police Officer shall forthwith report the seizure of such gold to the nearest Gold Control Officer or above the rank of a Superinte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Defence of India Rules was registered against one Munilal and two others. During the investigation of the case ornaments of considerable value were seized from them. The case of the respondents was that the ornaments were the property of various persons to whom they had advanced loan. The investigation by the police concluded in the untraced report which means that those persons were not found to have committed the offence for which they were sought to be hauled up. Police recommended the return of the properties t the respondents. The Judicial Magistrate passed the order for return of the property to the respondents from whom it was recovered after their furnishing securities. An application was thereafter filed by the Superintendent Central Excise and Customs, Moga, purporting to be one under Section 110 of the Act, contending therein that the property in question has been kept by the respondents in contravention of the Act. The learned Magistrate dismissed that application. Against that order revision petition has got dismissed as the appeal was already there. The appeal was however dismissed by the Sessions Judge as being barred by time. While deciding the revision petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than the case referred to above. Here the learned Magistrate has ordered the return of the property to the complainant after examining the case in the light of the material produced by the complainant. As evident from the judgment the A.P.P. has also prayed for the property to be returned to the complainant, just as the police report in the Punjab Haryana case recommended the return of the property to the respondents. 14. Section 110(2) of the Act points out the method to be adopted by the Police Officer. It cannot be said to be mandate to the Magistrate to act in a particular way so as to curtail his powers under the Code regarding the disposal of the property involed in the case. To think otherwise would amount to reading in between the lines. 15. Mr. Vyas next contended that even if the provisions of Section 110(2) of the Act are considered to be applicable to the Police Officer still it would not make any difference because he is to cause the gold to be conveyed and delivered to the nearest Gold Control Officer, and this duty he can discharge by obtaining order to this effect from the Court. The argument has no force, especially in the given circumstance of the case tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
