ANIS Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State.

(2.) NOTICE was issued to opposite party no. 2 but the office report dated 25.8.2007, shows that notice has not returned back after service and for the reasons mentioned here -in -after, there is no need to issue fresh notice to the opposite party no. 2 and the matter is being decided finally.

(3.) IT appears that the above case was pending before the court below and trial was going on, an amount of Rs. 17,000/ -, said to be the case property of crime no. 360/2004 under Section 379 IPC, was recovered from the possession of the accused/applicant, who is facing trial. The informant moved an application to release the said amount in his favour and vide order dated 28.7.2004, the court below rejected the release application observing that the recovered currency note may be required in evidence. Later on, another application was moved on behalf of the informant to release the amount. The court below obtained report from the A.P.O. concerned, allowed the application and released the amount on the condition that a bond amounting to Rs. 10,000/ - be filed. It has also been observed that defence has not made any objection on the release application being allowed. It also appears that an application dated 14.12.2004 had also been moved on behalf of the applicant to release the amount in his favour, which has not been disposed of.