SURESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both accused persons are petitioners in this application against appellate order under section 454 Cr. P.C. refusing to release the seized property in their favour.

(2.) On 18.2.1990, accused persons were found to be in possession of 31 Kilograms of semiprecious Garnet stones: Being of the opinion that accused have either stolen the same or are receivers of stolen property, the stones were seized from them and they were prosecuted for Offences under sections 379/411, I.P.C. In trial, accused persons were acquitted of the offences under sections 379, and 411, I.P.C. on the finding that the charges have not been proved. In spite of the fact that trial Court acquitted the accused, it directed to return the seized stones to the competent mining authority for confiscation to the State. Petitioner being aggrieved by that part of the judgment filed Criminal. Appeal and the learned Additional Sessions Judge having dismissed the same, this application has been filed.

(3.) Mr. Jairaj Behera, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the law is now well settled that on acquittal, accused from whose possession the property was seized is to be directed delivery thereof. There is no dispute that normally that should be the direction. Where, however, possession of property is restricted by statutory provision, Court is not to deliver the seized property until the restriction is removed. Court cannot permit a party to violate a statutory restriction by its order.