The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.116 of 2024 Kaleswar Sahoo … vs Petitioner Mr.Niranjan Singh, Advocate 1.State of Odisha 2.JMFC, First Class, Rural, Rourkela, Panposh … Opp. Parties Ms.S.Mishra, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Decision
ORDER 09.05.2024 (Through hybrid mode) 1. This Criminal Revision has been filed with the following prayer: Order No. 05. “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your lordships would graciously pleased to admit the CRLMC and call for the records from the lower court i.e., G.R. Case No.429 of 2011 (Trial No.170 of 2018) disposed of on 21.07.2023 and the criminal Misc. Case no.138 of 2023 order dated 20.02.2024 from the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Rural Rourkela and after hearing from the both side the order dated 20.02.2024 May kindly be quashed an allow the petitioner to return his Articles as per Seizure List from the office of the Court Malkhana of J.M.F.C. Rural Rourkela within a stipulated time….” 2. Although the prayer is not happily worded, but in ground ‘D’ of the CRLREV, it has been inter alia stated that : Page 1 of 5 “…….direction should be given to the learned trial court to release the articles in favour of the Petitioner the Real owner of the Articles which was seized by the Investigating officer at the time of the Investigating the matter i.e. the Gun License bearing No.3721 issued by ADM Rourkela and also 12 Bore D.B.B.L. Gun 1459, C/4 of the petitioner.” 3. Mr.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner and his wife faced trial in G.R. Case No.429 of 2011 (Trial No.170 of 2018) in the Court JMFC (Rural), Rourkela. His gun and gun license were seized during investigation and at the time of acquitting the petitioner and his wife in the said Judgment dated 21.07.2023, the learned J.M.F.C., has directed as follows: “8. As there is no direct or circumstantial evidence against the accused persons, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has not been able to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubts and the benefit of doubt is to be extended to the accused persons. 9. In the result therefore, I hold the accused persons are not found guilty of the offence punishable U/s. 341/323/294/324/354/506/34 of IPC and they are acquitted thereof U/s. 255 (1) of the Cr.P.C. and are discharged from their bail bonds. The accused persons are set at liberty forthwith. xxx xxx xxx 13. The seized articles be released in favour of owner by producing details particulars of the articles, four months Page 2 of 5 after lapse of appeal period, if no appeal is preferred and if appeal preferred, the property may be disposed off as per direction of appellate Court. “Enter this case as mistake of fact.” 4. Mr.Niranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after appeal period was over, the petitioner has filed an application under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. praying for release of the seized articles, namely gun and his license but the same has been rejected on 20.02.2024 by the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela and the copy of the order has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the Revision petition. 5. No fault can be found in the said order as the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela had already directed vide judgment dated 21.07.2023 that the seized articles shall be released in favour of the owner by producing detail particulars of the articles four months after lapse of the appeal period. 6. The learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela has directed as follows: “The case record is put up today for order. On perusal of the material available in the case record, it is found that the connecting case record i.e. G.R. Case No.429 of 2011 has already been disposed of on dated 21.07.2023 and while disposing the said case the order relating to disposal of the seized property has already been made. Hence, the petition is not maintainable and accordingly dismissed being devoid of any merit.” Page 3 of 5 7. In view of the said judgment, it was not necessary for the petitioner to approach the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela again for release of the gun and his gun license. 8. Perusal of the seizure list dated 30.04.2011 reveals that one 12 bore DBBL gun No.1459 C/4 and two live ammunitions have been seized from the petitioner on 30.04.2011 and perusal of the seizure list dated 21.05.2011 reveals that original gun license having serial No.20 of 7/2008 (RKL), money receipt of purchase of 25 nos. of ammunitions, one purchase bill of 12 Bore D.B. gun having no.1459 (C)/4 had been seized. 9. On instruction, Ms.S.Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel submits that the licence of the petitioner bearing No.20 of 7/2008 (Rourkela) granted till 31.03.2009 had been renewed up to 31.10.2012. The gun was seized during validity of the license. She also submits that the money receipt seized in the case reveals that it was in respect of a 12 bore double barrel gun having No.1459 C/4 was seized from the petitioner. 10. It is not disputed by the learned Addl. Standing Counsel that the gun as well as gun license have been seized from the petitioner. There is no rival claimant for the two articles. But she submits that the validity of the license had expired since long and in absence of a valid gun license, the gun cannot be released in favour of the petitioner. Page 4 of 5 11. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 20.02.2024 but in view of the judgment dated 21.07.2023 passed earlier by the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Rourkela directing for the release of the seized articles in favour of their owner, as the gun and license belong to the petitioner, the CRLREV is disposed of directing for release of the gun license to the petitioner to enable him to get it renewed. After renewal of his license it is open to the petitioner to apply for release of his gun. The gun will be released in his favour on production of a valid gun license. 12. With the above observation, the CRLREV is disposed of. 13. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ………………………... (SAVITRI RATHO) JUDGE Bichi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 13-May-2024 19:33:04 Page 5 of 5