ZAHIDA BANO Vs. MOHD RAJAB PARRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DURING investigation of FIR No. 100/2002 Police Station Bandipora a cow, a calf and one samawar and a Huqa came to be seized from the possession of the accused. Both the complainant and accused applied before the Judicial Magistrate Bandipora for release of the seized property. Ld. Magistrate has released the property in favour of the accused on superdnama on the following observations:

(2.) THE complainant has come up in revision. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that Ld. Magistrate was not justified in releasing the property in favour of the accused who had forcibly taken the property from the rightful owner. In support she relied upon Crimes XI 1 -1987(3) Guhati and AIR 1962, Bombay but none of them lays down the prepositon that the property cannot be released in favour of an accused. The person from whom a property is recovered and seized can be presumed to hold the entitlement to posses the same until otherwise proved. Ld. Trial Magistrate has for cogent reasons kept the property on the Superdnama of the accused and therefore no interference is warranted with the exercise of such discretion by the Ld. Magistrate especially when the seized property has not been released finally but only as an interim arrangement. Therefore there is no merit in the petition which is dismissed.