PRAKASH CHANDRA JAIN Vs. JAGDISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NON-APPLICANT No. 1 Jagdish was convicted under Section 457 I. P. C. by the magistrate, 1st Class, Raipur, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. A gold bar and two gold rings (Article H) seized from him, vide Ex.-P. 17, were ordered to be restored to the complainant applicant under S. 517 of the code of Criminal Procedure. During the course of the investigation, the non-applicant had made a statement Exh. P. 16 in consequence of which the seized article 'h' was recovered by him. His statement as recorded in the memorandum exh. P. 16 was:. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). .

(2.) ON appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused on the ground that the property discovered was in no way connected with the theft and housebreaking in the house of the complainant. He also observed:

(3.) THE learned counsel for the applicant complainant contends that under the circumstances of the case, the direction regarding the restoration of the seized property to the non-applicant No. 1 was erroneous and that these being quasi civil proceedings, the admission that the seized property was the property of the complainant which had been stolen from his house, contained in Exh. P. 16, could validly be taken into consideration and in that event he would be the person best entitled to the possession of the property.