- (1.)HEARD Sri Hasmath Pasha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, sri Satish R. Giriji, learned Government pleader appearing for the 1st respondent and sri A. Rama Mohan, Advocate appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the material on record.
(2.)BY the impugned orders, the Court below has directed that the amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- seized by police during investigation be returned to Smt. Shashi Prabha-respondent No. 2 herein. However, while doing so, the Court below has directed the concerned advocates, public prosecutor, complainant and the accused to be present before the Investigating Officer in the police station for disbursement of the currency notes. The petitioner is aggrieved by the second direction issued by the trial Court that the advocates, public prosecutor, complainant and accused shall be present before the police station. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he does not dispute that the respondent No. 2 is entitled to interim custody of the seized currency notes.
(3.)THE Apex Court in the case of sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of gujarat (ILR (4) 2003 Kar 2244) : (AIR 2003 sc 638), while dealing with the similar matter regarding interim custody of the currency notes and valuable articles, has ruled thus :
"para 8 : Valuable Articles and Currency with regard to valuable articles, such as golden or silver ornaments or articles studded with precious stones, it is submitted that it is of no use to keep such articles in police custody for years till the trial is over. In our view, this submission requires to be accepted. In such cases, Magistrate should pass appropriate orders as contemplated under S. 451, Cr. P. C. at the earliest. For this purpose, if material on record indicates that such articles belong to the complainant at whose house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, then seized articles be handed over to the complainant after :- (1) preparing detailed proper panchanama of such articles : (2) taking photographs of such articles and a bond that such articles would be produced if required at the time of trial; and (3) after taking proper security. For this purpose, the Court may follow the procedure of recording such evidence, as it thinks necessary, as provided under S. 451, Cr. P. C. , the bond and security should be taken so as to prevent the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. The Court should see that photographs of such articles are attested or counter-signed by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Still however, it would be the function of the court under S. 451, Cr. P. C. to impose any other appropriate condition. In case, where such articles are not handed over either to the complainant or to the person from whom such articles are seized or to its claimant, then the Court may direct that such articles be kept in bank lockers. Similarly, if articles are required to keep in police custody, it would be open to the SHO after preparing proper panchanama to keep such articles in a bank locker. In any case, such articles should be produced before the Magistrate within a week of their seizure. If required, the Court may direct that such articles be handed over back to the Investigating Officer for further investigation and identification. However, in no set of circumstances, the Investigating Officer should keep such articles in custody for a longer period for the purpose of investigation and identification. For currency notes, similar procedure can be followed. "
From the aforesaid dictum laid down by the Apex Court, it is clear that the seized currency notes be handed over to the complainant after (a) getting detailed proper panchanama prepared of such articles, (b)taking photograph of such currency notes and (c) after taking proper security. Even additional conditions may be imposed while releasing the materials, depending on the facts of the case.