IBRAHIM OTHAYOTH Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revisions are directed against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1996, of the Court of Sessions, Kozhikode Division, by which the court set aside the order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kozhikode, and directed the magistrate to release the gold biscuits and currency seized in Crime No. 73 of 1996 of Kasaba Police Station to the appellant Assistant Director of Income-tax, Calicut. THE bare minimum facts which are essential for disposing of these revisions are as follows :

(2.) THE question to be decided in these revisions is whether the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1996 is liable to be revised or requires any modification.

(3.) FROM the discussion contained in the judgment of the appellate court, it is seen that investigation by the Income-tax Department is already on to assess whether the seized articles represent the undisclosed assets/ income of Shamsudheen. The final report filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police on March 21, 1996, before the learned magistrate shows that one Jaffer who is the brother of Shamsudheen has something to do with the seized articles. The documents showing the ownership of the gold biscuits and currency which were produced not at the time of seizure, but produced later are suspected to be not genuine. The statements of accused Nos. 1 to 3 and one Ibrai which were recorded by the Assistant Director of Income-tax, Calicut, were produced before the court below. All the statements are to the effect that they are employees of Shamsudheen, Poomukkath House, Eranhikkal, and that they carried the gold biscuits belonging to him from the Karippur Airport. The statements also show that the articles were carried in a jeep which belongs to the said Shamsudheen. The appellate court while disposing of the application under Section 452 of the Criminal Procedure Code, was perfectly justified in looking into the statements recorded in the course of investigation including the statement recorded under Section 161, Criminal Procedure Code. The statements will go a long way to decide the claim made by the revision petitioners and the second respondent. The appellate court considered all the aspects and came to the conclusion that the articles should be released to the Income-tax Department. It cannot be said that the conclusion arrived at by the appellate court is legally unsustainable or perverse. So, no interference is called for under the revisional powers of this court.