SHEIK DAWOOD Vs. VELAYUDA SEMMANOTTI AND TEN ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application to revise the order of the Sessions Judge of West Tanjore, setting aside the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate with regard to the disposal of boats and nets.

(2.) The contention of Mr. Jayarama Aiyar for the petitioners is that the Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to pass the order as he did not enquire into the case himself and as an appellate Court he was not justified in interfering with the order of the lower court. The Sub-divisional Magistrate of Pattukotta passed an order on 19 September, 1926, with regard to the boats and nets directing that they be delivered to the fishermen. On 5 November, 1926, in modification of the previous order he passed another order that the boats and nets-should be delivered to the Muhammadans.

(3.) The question for consideration is whether the order of the Magistrate, dated 5th November, 1926, was proper or improper. That was the order that was set aside by the Sessions Judge. The contention of Mr. Jayarama Aiyar is that there was no offence committed regarding the boats and nets and therefore Section 517 is not applicable to the case. The first clause of Section 517 runs thus: When an enquiry or a trial in any Criminal Court is concluded, the court may make such order as it thinks fit for the disposal by destruction, confiscation, or delivery to any person claiming to be entitled to possession thereof or otherwise of any property or document produced before it or in its custody or regarding which any offence appear to have been committed, or which has been used for the commission of any offence.