The court emphasized the principle of early disposal of seized valuable articles and highlighted that seized currency notes should not be kept in police custody for a longer period.

C.R. Sarma, J.

1. Heard Mr. A. Pal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned PP-in-charge for the State.

2. This is an application under Sections 397/401/482 Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 19.3.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Agartala refusing to release the seized amount of Rs. 3,77,519/- in favour of the father of the accused Sri Tinku Lodh, from whose possession the money was seized.

3. The Petitioner's case is, in brief, as follows:

On the basis of the GD entry dated 16.1.2006, the Police raided the house of Sri Tinku Lodh, son of the present Petitioner and seized an amount of Rs. 3,77,519/-. On the next date, i.e. 17.1.2006 a complaint was lodged by Sri Subal Chandra Deb alleging therein that Sri Tinku Lodh extorted an amount of Rs. 50,000/- from him. Accordingly, the Agartala PS Case No. 08 of 2006 G.R. Case No. 70 of 2006 under Sections 384/34 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act was registered against Sri Tinku Lodh aforesaid. As Sri Tinku Lodh was avoiding arrest the Police submitted the chargesheet against the accused persons, namely, Biswajit Lodh, Sukesh Lodh and Kalyan Kar under Sections384/34 IPC read with Section 25(i)(a)/27 of the Arms Act vide Agartala PS C/S No. 95 of 2008. The accused Tinku Lodh, from whom the money was seized, was shown as absconder. The petition for release of the said money was filed by Sri Netai Lodh, the father of accused Tinku Lodh, on the basis of a power of attorney executed by the said accused in favour of his father.

4. Having heard both the parties, the learned Magistrate refused to handover the seized money in favour of the Petitioner on the ground that Tinku Lodh, from whom the money was seized, was absconding.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order the Petitioner has come up with this revision seeking relief in the forms of setting aside the impugned order and for releasing the seized money in favour of the Petitioner. Relying on the decision in the case of Surendrabhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat (2002) 10 SCC 283, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that seized money being currency note should not have been retained in the custody of the investigating agency and that the Petitioner, being the power of attorney holder of the person, was entitled to receive the seized money. Refuting the argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned PP-in-charge has submitted that Sri Tinku Lodh, from whom the money was seized, was the prime accused and that he was avoiding arrest and appearance in the court. It is further submitted that as Sri Tinku Lodh is avoiding arrest, the money seized from his possession cannot be released in favour of the power of attorney holder at this stage.

6. I have carefully gone through the decision relied on by the learned Counsel for the parties, heard the submissions made on behalf of the parties and perused the impugned order. In the case relied upon by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down the principle and the law to be followed at the time of disposing a petition under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Apex Court accepted the submission made on behalf of the Petitioner to the effect that valuable articles such as golden and silver ornaments or articles studded with precious stones should not be kept in Police custody for years till trial is over. The Hon'ble Apex Court while entertaining the need for early disposal of seized valuable/articles by passing appropriate order as contemplated under Section 451Cr.P.C. observed as follows:

14. In case, where such articles are not handed over either to the complainant or to the person from whom such articles are seized or to its claimant, then the Court may direct that such articles be kept in bank lockers. Similarly, if articles are required to be kept in police custody, it would be open to the SHO after preparing proper Panchn