- (1.) S. R. Bhargava, J. This criminal revision is directed against order dated 7-4-1989 passed by 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi, directing release of Caouthcouc ('kattha' hereinafter called 'kattha' for sake of brevity) in favour or opposite party No. 1 Ram Babu on his furnishing bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 5 lacs to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Parties have exchanged affidavits and the revision has been finally heard with the agreement of the parties at admission stage.
(2.) FACTS giving rise to this revision are that one Jagdish Khalifa, residing in House No. C-2/19 situate in Aurangabad jfpandariba, Varanasi, has a son Ashok Kumar Chaurasia (opposite-party No, 2 in this revision ). On 29-4-1988 Officers of the Forest Department accompanied by police raided the aforesaid Premises No. C-2/19 and seized 203 bags containing 5357 kilograns of kattha. Ashok Kumar Chaurasia was taken into custody. On 30-4-1988 application for release of Ashok Kumar on bail was moved and it was inter alia alleged that the kattha seized belongs to the Firm of his father Jagdish Khalifa. It is not disputed that the seizure was purported to be under Sec tion 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and a report uf seizure was made to the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the oilence on account of which the seizure was made. On 4-7-1988 opposite-party No. 1 Ram Balu Kesari moved application before the Magistrate concerned for seized kattha. His case was that partnership firm M/s Sri Ram Enterprises, dealing in supari, kattha and kirana etc. came into existence on 10-7-1987. Its head office is in Premises No. D-51/117, Purana Pandariba, Varanasi. Jagdish Prasad Chaurasia (aforementioned Khalifa) and Ram Babu have been partners of the said firm. Premises No. C-2/19 is not only residential house of Jagdish Prasad but is godown of the firm, kattha seized is stock in trade of the said firm. Applicant Ram Babu relied upon partnership deed dated 6-4-1988 on the basis of which the firm was registered with the Registrar of Firms in June, 1988. Certain sales tax papers and documents relating the purchase and payments were also filed. On behalf of the Forest Department and State of U. P. the application for release was opposed. It was contended that the seized kattha is Govern ment property liable to be confiscated. Magistrate had no jurisdiction to release the kattha. Documents filed by Ram Babu are forged and fictitious and have been prepared only for the purpose of this case. Even these papers do not prove that the seized kattha was purchased by the firm.
(3.) LEARNED Magistrate concluded that the documents filed by Ram Babu are not reliable and at any rate it has not been proved that the seized kattha was purchased by the firm. LEARNED Magistrate did not go into the question whether he had jurisdiction to release the Kattha or not. He dismissed the release application. Then Ram Babu went up in revision before Sessions Judge. It appears from the revisional Court judgment that it was inter alia argued on behalf of Ram Babu that the officers of Forest Department raided the godown illegally and wrongly seized kattha. Revisional Court did not accept the con tention that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to release kattha. The revi sional Court relied upon Section 457, Cr. P. C. It noted that no confiscation proceedings have been initiated in respect of seized kattha. Revisional Court further found that firm has been in existence and has been carrying oa business of kattha also. Without discussing the documents in detail and observing that the validity of documents will be touched at the time of final trial, the revisional Court found that the kattha belongs to the firm which is entitled to its interim custody. Then the revisional Court observed that the kattha is perishable in nature and may diminish in ultility and so in the interest of justice it should be released in favour of the applicant. With these findings the revisional Court allowed the revision and release kattha as stated earlier.;