Point of Law: Provisions under Section 457 of Code property which has been seized by police under provision of Code and has not been produced before criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, Magistrate may make such order as he thinks fit respecting disposal of such property or delivery of such property to person entitled to possession thereof.

JUDGMENT :

GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rakesh Srivastava and Shri Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned AGAs for the State.

2. This petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a order or direction to set-aside the impugned order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 11, Deoria, passed in Misc. No. 58/21 State vs. Krishna Kumar and others AND the order dated 13.08.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoria in Criminal Revision No. 45/2021 C.N.R. No. UPDEO1001041/ 2021 Ram Ashish Yadav vs. State of U.P. (Annexure No. 1 and 2 to this writ petition).

(ii) Issue a order or direction commanding and directing the learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 11, Deoria, to act in accordance with law and release Rs. 4,00,300/- related with Case Crime No. 32/20 registered under Section 60, 63, 72 of the Excise Act, P.S. Bankata, District Deoria, in favour of the petitioner forthwith.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of the FIR lodged by the opposite party No. 2 at Police Station Bankata, District Deoria, F.I.R. No. 0032 of 2020 was registered against the petitioner under Section 60, 63, 72 of the Excise Act. During the alleged raid of the house of the petitioner the police recovered Rs. 4,00,300/- which was said to have been obtained by the petitioner after the sale of liquor etc.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner regarding possession of liquor etc. is totally false and no such item has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner or from his house as has been alleged. Further submission is that the police has illegally entered in the house of the petitioner and taken away cash of Rs. 4,00,300/- kept for expanses to be incurred in marriage of the petitioner’s daughter. It is also contended that arbitrary and illegal act of seizure of personal rupees of the petitioner by the police is high handed, callous and capricious in nature and hence was challenged before both the learned courts below were under legal obligation to release the seized amount in favour of the petitioner but illegally the same has been negatived hence the impugned orders dated 03.03.2021 and 13.08.2021 are not sustainable in the eye of law and are liable to be quashed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prayer for releasing the currency notes recovered from the possession of the accused could not be withheld by the court till conclusion of the trial.

6. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court in case of Manjit Singh vs. State, 2014 (9) Laws (DLH) 311 in which it has been held as under:

“53. In Nidhi Kaushik vs. Union of India, LPA No. 736/2013, decided on 26th May, 2014, the Division Bench of this Court, in which I was a member, examined the aforesaid judgments and summarized the law as under:

“Consequences of refusing to follow well settled law If an authority does not follow the well settled law, it shall create confusion in the administration of justice and undermine the law laid down by the constitutional Courts. The consequence of an authority not following the well settled law amounts to contempt of Court as held by the Supreme Court in East India Commercial Co. Ltd. (supra), Makhan Lal (supra), Baradakanta Mishra (supra), M.P. Dwivedi (supra), T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (supra), Maninderjit Singh Bitta (supra), Priya Gupta (supra) and various High Courts in Hasmukhlal C. Shah (supra), Secretary, Labour Social Welfare and Tribunal Development Department. Sachivalaya (supra), C.T. Subbarayappa (supra), Parmal Singh (supra), Ex-CT Nardev (supra) and Head of Department, Air Force Station Amla.”

Summary of principles of law the following principles emerge from the above judgments:

54. The properties seized by the police during investigation or trial have to be produced before the competent Court