S.C. Agarwal, J. - (1.) THIS criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.7.2010 passed by the 3rd A.C.J.M., Varanasi, in Criminal Case No. 2496 of 2010 arising out of case crime No. 73 of 2010, under Sections 420, 272, 273 IPC, P.S. Adampur, District -Varanasi, whereby the application dated 28.6.2010 filed by accused -revisionist Suresh Kumar Jaiswal for de -sealing the room of his house was rejected.
(2.) IN brief, the facts are that on 8.1.2010 Sri Balveer Singh Gaur, S.O., P.S. Adampur, District -Varanasi, in pursuance of a secret information, accompanied by police force, City Magistrate, Food Inspector Nagar Nigam, Varanasi, Chief Food Inspector and Food Inspectors raided the house No. A -38/439, Nai Basti, Koniya, P.S. Adampur and found that in a room, a spices grinding machine was fixed and labourers Vinod Verma and Om Prakash alongwith the revisionist -Suresh Kumar Jaiswal were mixing colour in the spices. In another room, the prepared goods and raw materials including mango seed, coriander, curry powder, red chillies, turmeric powder etc, were recovered. The samples were taken. Suresh Kumar Jaiswal managed to escape. Articles suspected to be adulterated were seized and sealed in a room and keys were handed over to Smt. Gudiya wife of the revisionist. It was found that prohibited colours, rice husk and other un -edible articles were being mixed in the chilli powder, turmeric powder and curry powder etc. for sale. An application was moved by the revisionist on 28.6.2010 before the Magistrate for de -sealing and release of the premises on the ground that grinding machine and other articles are kept in the sealed room. In absence thereof, the applicant is unable to conduct his business. After report of the Public Analyst, the case shall be disposed of on merits but the applicant had a right to conduct his business and the police had no power to seal his premises.
(3.) LEARNED Magistrate rejected the application on the ground that seized articles being in bulk quantity were kept in the room and were given in the supurdigi of wife of the applicant himself. Some of the articles may be adulterated, which cannot be released in favour of the applicant. Hence this revision.;