- (1.) HEARD Mr. J. S. Walia, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. R. P. Shukla, learned Additional Government Advocate. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 7. 11. 2008 passed in criminal case No. 451 of 2008 by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs), Lucknow whereby petitioner's application for releasing the vehicle No. UP-32 AN 3831 (truck), has been allowed whereas the request for releasing 102 gas cylinders has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has failed to establish the ownership and entitlement over the seized gas cylinders during the course of investigation as also to prove that seized cylinders are those, which were supplied by the Indian Oil Corporation. The petitioner challenged the said order before the revisional court through criminal revision No. 402 of 2008 and the learned Special Judge (Ayodhya Prakaran),/additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow rejected the same by means of an order dated 27. 11. 2008. The order dated 27. 11. 2008 passed by learned Special Judge (Ayodhya Prakaran)/additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow is also under under challenge before this Court. Through the supplementary affidavit filed today, the petitioner has brought on record a letter dated 5. 12. 2008 issued by the Senior Regional Manager of Indian Oil Corporation, who has certified that the petitioner is a distributor of Indian Oil Corporation and the petitioner was supplied 180 commercial cylinders through invoice No. 628393885 dated 25. 10. 2008; 306 domestic cylinders through invoice No. 628399006 dated 26. 10. 2008 and again 306 domestic cylinders through invoice No. 628397888 dated 26. 10. 2008, for distribution. Though the certificate provided by the Senior Regional Manager of Indian Oil Corportion does not specifically verify the seized cylinders but it is not disputed that the petitioner is a distributor of Indian Oil Corporation as the petitioner was supplied the cylinders by the Corporation, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get released the cylinders seized, in his favour on furnishing sufficient security to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate as well as with the condition imposed by the learned Magistrate as he deems fit for the purpose. Therefore, I hereby stay the operation of the orders impugned dated 7. 11. 2008 and 27. 11. 2008 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs), Lucknow and learned Special Judge (Ayodhya Prakaran)/additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, respectively, with a direction that gas cylinders shall be released in favour of the petitioner under the terms of the observation made hereinabove or any other condition as deems fit, can be imposed by the learned Magistrate for releasing the same, which shall be subject to further orders of this Court. Four weeks time as prayed by learned Additional Government Advocate is allowed to file counter affidavit. List thereafter. Keeping in view the value of the vehicle No. UP 32 AN 3831 (truck) as has been assessed by the New India Assurance Company Limited, I am of the view that the bonds and sureties asked for the value as Rs. 8 Lacs is so high, therefore, the same is reduced to the tune of Rs. 4 Lacs. Accordingly, it is provided that if the petitioner furnishes bonds and sureties to the amount of Rs. 4 Lacs, the vehicle in question shall be released in favour of the petitioner. .;