MUKHTAR SINGH @ MUKHA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Akhil Kumar Sah, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Sri Nandan Arya, learned A.G.A. for the Respondent No. 1.

(2.) AS per the affidavit of service dated 7 -12 -2009 notice on behalf of Respondent No. 2 has been received by his real brother. Respondent No. 2 is served through substituted service.

(3.) I have carefully examined the record. Only because revisionist is acquitted from the charges under Section 379 and 411 I.P.C, it does not mean that he is entitled for the release of the Lori (truck) in his favour. It is the matter of evidence as to whether the case property belongs to the accused or belongs to the complainant. In a miscellaneous proceeding like this, this question can not be decided. As per the complainant truck belongs to him. If charges under Section 379 and 411 I.P.C. not proved, as in the instant case, resulting in acquittal does not mean property would be released in favour of the accused in each and only case. Release of property depends upon certain requirements. In the matter of Registered Motor Vehicle, same cannot be released in favour of the accused on his acquittal. It has to be released in favour of the registered owner.