RAJEEV CHAKRAPANI Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short grievance of the petitioner is that a motor pump belonging tohim, which has been seized by the police and which has been produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, has not so far been released to him, eventhough he hadapplied forreleaseof the same.Annex.A2 is the petition submitted by the petitioner before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Annex.A3 is the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate calling for objections, if any, and Annex.A4 is the report submitted by the police officer concerned.

(2.) I have no hesitation to agree that the Sub Divisional Magistrate mustdisposeofAnnex.A2 application expeditiously. A direction is hence issued to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to dispose of Annex.A2 in accordance with law and expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of 10 days from the date on which a copy of this order is produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate.

(3.) This Crl.M.C. is allowed in part with the above directions. Needless to say, the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate can be challenged in accordance with law by the petitioner, if need arises.