SURYAKANT Vs. CHANDANMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On a complaint made by the petitioner herein, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore, took cognizance of the offence u/s 406 of IPC against the accused -respondent. During the pendency of the proceedings a search warrant was issued and some jewellery worth Rs. 25,00,000/ - was recovered from the house of accused -respondent. According to the complainant this jewellery was deposited by him with the accused -respondent for safe custody as his house was under repairs at the relevant time. However, the case of the respondent is that the jewellery was pledged with him by the complainant by way of security for a loan of Rs. 23,00,000/ - advanced about ten years back. The learned trial Magistrate, while ordering for seizure of the jewellery, had initially directed that the seized articles be allowed to be in the custody of the accused -respondent on his furnishing adequate security.

(2.) HOWEVER , later on after hearing both the parties, the Magistrate by his order dated 16.7.2002 ordered that the seized jewellery be kept in the custody of the complainant on his furnishing adequate security pending decision of the case. In revision filed by the accused respondent the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, vide order dated 11.9.2002 reversed the order of the Magistrate and directed that the seized jewellery be kept in the custody of accused -respondent on his furnishing security as aforesaid. This is how now the parties are before this Court in revision filed by the complainant. Having argued the matter for some time, learned counsel for the parties agreed that the seized articles be kept in some locker with a nationalised Bank, in the joint names of both the parties with a further direction that the locker is to be operated only under the orders of the Court.

(3.) It is, however, noted that there are certain silver items, a table -watch and painting which on account of their size cannot be kept in such a locker. In my considered view, these articles may be allowed to be continued in the custody of the accused respondent from whose possession they have been recovered on his furnishing adequate security to the satisfaction of the trial Magistrate for their safe custody. The rest of the articles, it is directed, be kept in a locker with State Bank of Indore, P.Y. Road Branch, Indore, in the joint names of the complainant and the accused. It is further directed that the locker shall be operated only under the orders of the Trial Court. The locker shall be opened on conclusion of the trial under orders of the trial Court and the articles shall be delivered to the party which may be held entitled thereto under the final judgment in the case. The key of the locker will be deposited with the trial Court to be kept in double lock with other valuables.