RAM CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Bench has been constituted on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court who doubted the correctness of the proposition of law laid down by B. M. Lall, J. in the case of Bis -hambhar Rai v. State : AIR1953All199 in respect of interpretation of the language of the explanation appended to Section 517 of the Old Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) BEFORE entering into the question referred to this Bench we would first of all look to the facts giving rise to this reference.

(3.) AGGRIEVED from that order Ram Chandra presented a revision to this Court. The learned single Judge had no difficulty in coming to this conclusion that although in the trial of the case Under Section 395 no orders were passed by that court yet it was open to that court, later on when moved by the accused to pass an appropriate order Under Section 517(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned single Judge also did not find any difficulty in holding that it the crops still existed or were liable to be returned the same could be easily returned to Opposite Parties 2 to 11 from whose possession they were seized. Doubting the dicta laid down by B. M. Lall. J. in the case noted above the learned single Judge gave his own views to the effect that the language of explanation appended to Section 517 was wide enough to give ample power to the criminal court not only to trace the property and Order its restoration if existed in its original shape or form but it had also the power to lay its hand on money equivalent not necessarily the same money. Having taken that View he thought it fit to get the matter finally decided by a larger Bench and hence this Revision has come to us for decision.