LUMBA RAM Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions have been filed by first informant Lumba Ram - one against the order dated 25.3.1994 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate accepted the F.R. and ordered that the recovered property (buffalo) shall be auctioned, and the second against the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jodhpur dated 30.5.1994 whereby he accepted the revision petition filed by Meera Ram against the order dated 25.3.1994 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate and ordered that the buffalo and its progeny be given to Meera Ram.

(2.) The relevant facts are that Lumba Ram had lodged a report on 16.1.1993 at P.S. Dangiyavas stating that his three she-buffalos were missing. Thereafter on 7.2.1993 he lodged a report referring to his earlier report dated 16.1.1993 stating that he had seen one of his buffalo tied in the-house of Gordhan Ram Vishnoi of village Guda Vishnoiyan. On this report a case under section 379 Penal Code was registered. During investigation, the police seized the buffalo from Meera Ram. Statements of various witnesses were recorded. Eventually, police came to the conclusion that the buffalo recovered from Meera Ram did not belong to Lumba Ram and this buffalo was not the stolen property. At the same time, the Police held that the buffalo seized from the house of Meera Ram did not belong to Meera Ram but it belonged to someone else which reached in Guda Vishnoiyan while moving. The police gave F.R. in the matter. The learned Magistrate after hearing the first informant accepted the final report and ordered that the buffalo be auctioned and the parties may get their rights decided by the Civil Court.

(3.) This part of the order that the buffalo be auctioned was challenged by Meera Ram by filing revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge. The revision petition was heard by Addl. Sessions Judge who held by the impugned order that the buffalo and its progeny be handed over to Meera Ram from whom buffalo was seized. The petitioner has filed revision petition No. 298/94 against that order. He has filed revision petition No. 237/94 against the order passed by the learned Magistrate accepting the F.R.