Lately, The Gujarat HC said that it’s of no use to maintain articles in police custody for years until the trial is over.
The bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora was coping with the petition filed with a prayer to launch the muddamal i.e. Gold bar, which was seized and to quash and put aside the order handed by 4th Extra District and Classes Decide, Ahmedabad (Rural) in addition to the order handed by the 2nd Extra Judicial Justice of the Peace First Class whereby the functions for releasing the muddamal have been rejected.
On this case, The eye of the Court docket was invited to the judgment of the Apex Court docket within the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, whereby the Apex Court docket in regard to the precious articles and foreign money notes, held that “no helpful objective can be served to maintain such articles in police custody for years until the trial is over and in such instances, Justice of the Peace ought to move acceptable orders as contemplated beneath Part 451 of the Cr.P.C., on the earliest.”
Ms. Moxa Thakkar, counsel for the respondent submitted that the powers of the Court docket beneath Article 226 of the Structure to order the discharge of the muddamal will be exercised at any time at any time when the Court docket deems it acceptable, nonetheless nevertheless it was urged that the petition is probably not entertained.
Excessive Court docket regarded into the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat the place the Court docket has expressed its view, directing the process for handing over foreign money notes, which is as beneath:
“Priceless Articles and Forex Notes
11. With regard to useful articles, reminiscent of golden or sliver ornaments or articles studded with valuable stones, it’s submitted that it’s of no use to maintain such articles in police custody for years until the trial is over. In our view, this submission requires to be accepted. In such instances, Justice of the Peace ought to move acceptable orders as contemplated beneath Part 451 Cr.P.C. on the earliest.
12. For this functions, if materials on document signifies that such articles belong to the complainant at whose home theft, theft or dacoity has taken place, then seized articles be handed over to the complainant after:-
(1) making ready detailed correct panchanama of such articles:
(2) taking images of such articles and a bond that such articles can be produced if required on the time of trial; and (3) after taking correct safety.”
Be part of LAW TREND WhatsAPP Group for Authorized Information Updates-Click on to Be part of
The bench said that the facility beneath Part 451 of Cr.P.C. must be exercised expeditiously and judiciously, which clearly empowers the Court docket to order for correct custody of the articles or property pending conclusion of the trial, as proprietor of the article wouldn’t undergo due to its remaining unused or its misappropriation. The Court docket or the police wouldn’t be required to maintain the article in protected custody and if the correct panchnama earlier than handing over possession of article is ready, that can be utilized in proof as an alternative of its manufacturing earlier than the Court docket through the trial.
Excessive Court docket after relying upon Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai’s case opined that the custody of the money, if granted in favour of the petitioner, no prejudice is more likely to be brought about to the prosecution.
In view of the above, the bench allowed the petition.
Case Title: Milanbhai Tarleshbhai Mandaliya v. State of Gujarat
Bench: Justice Ilesh J. Vora
Case No.: R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 10029 of 2022
Counsel for the appellant: Mr. PV Patadiya
Counsel for the respondent: Ms. Moxa Thakkar
