MUNNILAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal, under Section 454 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the order, as contained in the operative part of a common judgment dated 30-4-2001 passed by III ASJ, chhatarpur in S. T. Nos. 86/97, 213/96 and 140/90, directing retention of a 12 bore gun, ten cartridges and a wrist watch, allegedly seized from the possession of the appellant in custody of Court till conclusion of the trial of the absconding accused persons.

(2.) THE appellant is amongst the persons, who were prosecuted and tried on the charges of the offences punishable under Sections 395 read with sections 397 and 396 of the Indian Penal Code. As per seizure memo (Exh. P-20), the Investigating Officer S. N. Singh had seized the gun as the firearm used in commission of the dacoity with murder as early as on 17-7-1995. Although, for want of incriminating evidence, learned Trial Judge acquitted the appellant of the offences yet, he proceeded to direct retention of gun on the ground that some of the accused were still absconding.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant has contended that the gun seized from him has nothing to do with the Trial of the absconding accused persons.