- (1.) A. Mateen, J. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist as well as the learned A. G. A.
(2.) THE present revision has been preferred by the revisionist challenging the order dated 26-11-2002 passed by the Special/additional Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli, in Criminal Case No. 76 of 2001, rejecting the application of the revisionist with respect to release of the Jeep No. U. P. 33-A/2448. Briefly, the prosecution case is that the said Jeep UP 33- A/2448 which was earlier owned by Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal was while being checked by the police four Kilogram Narcotics (Ganja) was recovered as such it being the case property was seized. An application was earlier moved by Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal claiming himself the owner of the aforesaid Jeep on 1-8-2002 but while that application was pending another application was moved by the present revisionist Ram Lakhan on 12-8-2002 stating therein that earlier the owner of the Jeep Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal had transferred the same in his favour on 8-8-2002 as such the said Jeep be released in favour of the present revisionist.
(3.) THE application of the present revisionist was rejected by the Special/additional Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli, vide his order dated 26-11-2002, hence the present revision. A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the Counsel for the revisionist indicating therein that the Jeep was seized and it is lying under open sky at the police station and if it is not released in favour of the revisionist the same will be damaged and ruined. He has also indicated that the Jeep so seized has not yet been confiscated.;