DINESH SHANTARAM JAITAPKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An appeal is filed by the present applicant Dinesh Shantaram Jaitapkar in the Court. The said appeal is admitted. The appellant is convicted by the trial Court for an offence punishable under Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of one year. The applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 120-B of IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonemnt for six months. The sentence has been suspended during the pendency of this appeal.

(2.) During the course of the investigation, the locker belonging to the applicant was seized by the respondent. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the said locker was not a part of the investigation nor was the seizure panchanama of the locker relied upon in the chargesheet. In paragraph 7 of the affidavit, in response to the present application, it is stated by the respondent that the same may be required at a later stage during the trial particularly in the event there is any recovery ordered by the learned trial Court against the applicant.

(3.) In my opinion, as the seizure panchanama of the locker has not been relied upon in the chargesheet, the application though vehemently opposed by learned counsel Ms. Desai, the application deserves to be allowed by imposing certain conditions which the learned counsel for the applicant, on instructions, is agreeable. The applicant is personally present in the court and so instructs his counsel.