OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Bal Krishna Narayana, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

(2.) In a criminal case accused Om Prakash and Shiv Shankar had been convicted under Section 379, IPC vide judgment and order dated 11-9-86. During the investigation of the said case truck No. USF 8051 was seized by the police and was given in the Supurdagi of one Rajendra Pal Singh Advocate with the condition to produce the truck in the Court whenever so required. On conclusion of the trial the trial Court did not pass an order directing the delivery of possession of the truck to the person entitled to its possession. Smt. Chunni Gupta opposite party No. 2 in the present revision moved an application under Section 452, Cr. P. C. for release of the truck claiming to be the person entitled to its possession. The said application was rejected by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 10-11-95. Opposite party No. 2 filed criminal revision No. 48 of 1995 before the Sessions Judge, Fatehpur. The Additional Sessions Judge in whose Court the revision was transferred allowed the revision by judgment and order dated 19-4-97 directing the release of the truck in favour of Smt. Chunni Gupta and further directing that in case the truck is not recovered from the possession of the respondent the costs of the truck amounting to Rs. 3,50,000.00 shall be recovered from them as arrears of land revenue and shall be given to Smt. Chunni Gupta.

(3.) It is this order of the appellate Court which is being challenged in this revision mainly on the ground that under Section 452, Cr. P. C. only direction for restoration of the property produced before the Court during the trial can be passed. No order for realization of value of such property and recovery of the amount as arrears of land revenue can be passed.