VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an applica ­tion under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 20.11.2001 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad relat ­ing to case crime No. 254 of 2001 of Police Station Kydganj District Allahabad under sections 380/411 I.P.C. and the judgment and order dated 15.5.2002 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Allahabad in Crimi ­nal Revision No. 245 of 2002 which was filed against the aforesaid order of the CJM Allahabad.

(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. are that on 27.10.2001 the applicant Vijay Kumar lodged an F.I.R. at police station Kydganj District Allahabad against the ac ­cused Renu and Pintoo (opp. Parties No. 2 and 3 in the present case) with these alle ­gations that Vijay Kumar on the death of his mother had gone to Jasra along with his family. When he returned back to his house, he noticed that some cash and or ­naments were missing from a Box in his house No. 168B Krishna Nagar Kydganj Allahabad whereas other items lying in the house were untouched. He had suspicion upon Renu and Pintoo, who had distant relationship with him. Thereafter he went to the police station to lodge the report.

(3.) THEREAFTER Vijay Kumar moved an application for release of the above orna ­ments. This application was rejected by the A.C.J.M. Allahabad vide his order dated 20.11.2001 mentioning therein that the applicant had adduced a receipt of the or ­naments but it was not prima facie proved that the applicant was owner of the recov ­ered ornaments. Aggrieved with that order the applicant filed Criminal Revision No. 245 of 2002 before the learned Sessions Judge which was heard and decided by Sri P.K. Srivastava Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Allahabad vide his judgment and order dated 15.5.2002. He was of the view that it was not sufficiently proved that the applicant was owner of the ornaments and that the ornaments were case property and they will be required to be produced before the Court at the time of hearing of the case, hence there was no justification for releas ­ing those ornaments. The revision was therefore dismissed. Aggrieved with these two orders the applicant filed the present application under section 482 Cr. P.C.