VENUS POLYMERS Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMAR Saran, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A.

(2.) THIS application has been filed for release of 1000 tins of Swastik brand vanaspati ghee in favour of the applicant on the ground that they were purchasers of the same from M/s. Swastik Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. , Nepal which had been seized by the police in consequence of a robbery of the same from a truck carrying them from Nepal to the applicants firm regarding which a case at Crime No. 2607 of 2006, State v. Shahid under Sections 394 and 411, IPC, PS Kila, District Bareilly had been registered.

(3.) I think that the learned Magistrate erred in passing the said order as the vanaspati goods being a perishable commodity were likely to decay or to be lost if they lay unattended in the police station. Moreover it was incumbent on the learned Magistrate to have issued notice and given an opportunity of hearing to the other two parties, i. e. , the manufacturer and the transporter of the goods to come forward and raise their counter- claims or to give no objection certificates for release of the goods in favour of the applicant/alleged purchaser. In the counter-affidavit filed by the State also the stance of the learned Magistrate has been defended.