JUDGMENT

N. PRUSTY, J. — This revision application has been filed against the order dated 13.5.2005 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Loisingha in G.R.Case No. 18 of 2005 rejecting the prayer of the petitioners for release of the seized cash (currency notes) under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Heard Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

The learned Trial Court in the impugned order has observed in unequivocal term that “Though prima facie, it appears that the petitioners are entitled for possession of the cash so seized as those were recovered immediately after it was stolen from the accused persons and their acquisition but the identification of the cash so seized is required in course of trial as submitted by the learned A.P.P. as its release may affect the course of jus¬tice at the time of trial.”

Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that admittedly the cash, which has been seized, was snatched away from the petitioner No. 1/Shyam Meher while Shyam Meher was proceeding to Bolangir to purchase cloth in a motor cycle alongwith his brother/petitioner No. 2 and one Sachita Mahali