MANGU LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mangoo Lal has filed this revision against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad dated 8-2-1966 allowing the opposite party's--i.e. the State's--application Under Section 520 Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to this revision are as follows:

(3.) On behalf of the Applicant his Learned Counsel Sri B.C. Saxena advanced two contentions in support of this revision. His first contention was that as an application Under Section 520 Code of Criminal Procedure was not maintainable in the court below, it acted illegally in passing the order in question on it. His second contention was that as the Applicant was acquitted of both the offences by the trial court he was entitled to the return of the gold and gold ornaments in respect of which the offences were allegedly committed. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties I am satisfied that while the first contention has no force the second contention is well founded.