Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - (1.)The petitioner has preferred this criminal misc.
petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C., 1973 against the order dated 22.03.2018 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Misc. 9/18 Lune Kha/State (FIR No. 212/2017 under Sec. 8/15 NDPS P.S. Rajiyasar) which dismissed the application under Sec. 451 Crimial P.C., 1973 to allow, the same.

(2.)Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a limited argument that under Sec. 451 Crimial P.C., 1973 the domain of the learned court would be to order for custody and disposal of the property pending trial in certain cases. Furthermore, under Sec. 451 Crimial P.C., 1973 in Explanation, as per learned counsel for the petitioner, the word "property" includes any property regarding which an offence appears to have been committed or which appears to have been used for the commission of any offence.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in AIR 2003 SC 638, relevant portion of which is as follows:-
"4. Learned counsel further referred to the relevant sections 451 and 457 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which reads thus--

"451. Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases.--When any property is produced before any Criminal Court during any inquiry of trial, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit for the property custody of such property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed of.

Explanation.-- For the purposes of this section, "property" includes

(a) property of any kind or document which is produced before the Court or which is in its custody.

(b) any property regarding which an offence appears to have been committed or which appears to have been used for the commission of any offence.

457. Procedure by police upon seizure of property.-

(1) Whenever the seizure of property by any police officer is reported to a Magistrate under the provisions of this Code, and such property is not produced before a Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate may make such order as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the delivery of such property to the person entitled to the possession thereof, or if such person cannot be ascertained, respecting the custody and production of such property.

(2) If the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may order the property to be delivered to him on such conditions (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit and if such person is unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case, issue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such property consists, and requiring any person who may have a claim thereto, to appear before him and establish his claim within six months from the date of such proclamation."

5. Sec. 451 clearly empowers the Court to pass appropriate orders with regard to such property, such as--

(1) for the proper custody pending conclusion of the inquiry or trial;

(2) to order it to be sold or otherwise disposed of, after recording such evidence as it think necessary;

(3) if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay to dispose of the same.

6. It is submitted that despite wide powers, proper orders are not passed by the Courts. It is also pointed out that in the State of Gujarat there is Gujarat Police Manual for disposal and custody of such articles. As per the Manual also, various circulars are issued for maintenance of proper registers for keeping the muddamal articles in safe custody.

7. In our view, the powers under Sec. 451 Cr.P.C., 1973 should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely:-

1. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation;

2. Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody;

3. If the proper panchnama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and