The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner is entitled to the value of missing seized articles if the state has initiated action against the responsible party.

A.S. Bopanna, J.

The petitioner is before this Court to seek release of seized gold and silver articles in PF No. 70/01 in Crime No. 196 of 2001. In view of the subsequent development, the petitioner is seeking that respondent 3-State be directed to pay the value of the said articles as indicated by them in Annexure-R1 to the petition.

2. The petitioner claims to be an authorised pawn broker. Since a case in Crime No. 196 of 2001 was registered, in the course of the investigation, the articles were seized from the shop belonging to the petitioner. The articles seized from the shop of the petitioner were enlisted in PF No. 70/01. When the further proceedings in Crime No. 196 of 2001 was in progress before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Davanagere in C.C. No. 69 of 2003, the petitioner herein filed an application under Section 457 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking release of the articles seized from the shop belonging to the petitioner. Since the said application was to be considered by the Court below, the respondent-police authorities were required to respond to the same.

3. In the said proceedings a report dated 20-12-2011 was filed wherein the petitioner indicated that the said articles were not available despite the same having been seized and having been kept in proper custody with the department. It is in that view, the consideration of the application for release of the articles did not arise for consideration. The petitioner therefore claiming to be aggrieved by the said act and since the respondents had taken a stand that the articles though seized are not available at this juncture, had approached this Court seeking for a direction to release gold and silver articles. However since it was indicated that the same was not available and the authorities in statement of objections to the instant petition stated the value of the property as per Annexure-R1, the petitioner has amended the writ petition and sought the prayer for payment of the value of the articles.

4. In that view, the perusal of the objection statement filed on behalf of the respondent would indicate that in view of the accused Mallik Saheb stating that the articles had been found in the shop belonging to the petitioner on 18-8-2001, the proceedings were held to recover the articles from the shop of the petitioner as has been indicated and the same had been listed in PF No. 70/01. The respondents, have further indicated that the respondent-authorities came to know that seized gold articles were missing and accordingly on 17-2-2012, pursuant to the direction issued by the Superintendent of Police, Davanagere, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police has lodged a complaint against the Police Sub-Inspector, with regard to missing of gold and silver articles seized in PF No. 70/01 and also PF No. 69/01. A complaint was filed against Sri H.K. Seetharam, Police Sub-Inspector was registered in Crime No. 36 of 2012, dated 17-2-2012 and the proceedings in that regard is pending. The case was thereafter transferred to the CID who have thereafter investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet against the then Police Sub-Inspector - Sri H.K. Seetharam.

5. In view of the contentions on behalf of the respondent, the fact that certain gold and silver articles have been seized from the shop belonging to the petitioner, cannot be disputed. If that be the position, when the petitioner had made an application under Section 457 of the Criminal Procedure Code, normal course of law would have been followed by the learned Magistrate and appropriate orders for custody of the same could have been passed. However the same arise for consideration in the instant case since admittedly the seized articles are missing. As noticed from the contentions of the objection statement, the respondents have also initiated action against the Police Inspector Sri H.K. Seetharam and charge-sheet has been filed. Whether the allegations against Sri H.K. Seetharam are proved