LALA HAR BHAGWANDAS Vs. DIWAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition purports to be one under Section 520 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It seeks a reversal of the order, dated 13-6-1959, passed by Shri S.P. Hakim, First Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in Criminal Revision No. 17 of 1959, arising out of the direction given by Shri H.N. Dubey, Magistrate First class, Jabalpur about return of a truck involved in Criminal Case No. 1486 of 1958, dated 10-3-1959.

(2.) The learned counsel for the non-applicant urged that under Section 520 of the Criminal Procedure Code, no such application lies, where this Court is not in seisin of an appeal or a revision. The learned counsel for the applicants urged that Section 520 of the Criminal Procedure Code confers supervisory powers on this Court. The said section is as follows: "Any Court of appeal, confirmation, reference or revision may direct any order under Section 517, Section 518 or Section 519, passed by a Court subordinate thereto, to be stayed pending consideration by the Former Court, and may modify, alter or annul such order and make any further orders that may be just." Where an appeal on a reference or a revision or a confirmation proceeding is pending before the High Court or has already been disposed of, an application under Section 520 would no doubt, lie to this Court. But, where the matter docs not come up to the High Court at all, but the judgment of the first Court or the Sessions Court becomes final, would an application under this section lie to this Court?

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicants invited attention to the observations of Shiv Dayal J. in Shanta Ram v. State Criminal Revn. No. 6 of 1959, D/-5-21959. The learned Judge held that the expression 'Court of appeal' merely indicates a Court which is the ordinary Court to which an appeal is preferred from orders passed by the trial Court. In the opinion of the learned judge, it is not a reasonable construction to add the words 'when such Court is hearing or disposing of an appeal from the judgment of conviction or acquittal passed by the trial Court' after the word 'Revision'. In support of this construction, the learned Judge relied on Assistant Collector of Customs Central Excise. Kandamangalam v. Krishna Pillai, AIR 1956 Mad 42, Cheranjilal v. Jabar Chand, AIR 1953 Madh B 149 and Walchand Jasraj v. Hari Anant, AIR 1932 Bom 534, The learned Judge purported to dissent from the view expressed by Bose J. in Ibrahim v. Emperor, ILR (1946) Nag 940; (AIR 1947 Nag 33).