The court emphasized the need for expedited interim custody of property under S.451, ensuring rightful claimants are heard and property is not unduly retained by authorities.

1. This petition is directed against the order dated 22/08/2008 passed by Sessions Judge, Korba in Criminal Revision No. 51/2008 affirming the order dated 14/07/2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba in an unregistered application for interim custody of the property.

2. The order is challenged on the ground that the learned Court below has committed an illegality by denying the interim custody of the valuable property including the currency notes to the applicant who is the owner of the same and at whose instance an offence punishable under S.395 of the Indian Penal Code has been instituted.

3. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record including the order impugned.

4. Counsel for the applicant submits that on 09/06/2008 dacoity was committed in the house of the applicant and the dacoits took away the currency notes, gold and silver articles, gold rings containing precious stones as well as the other articles. The applicant lodged the report. Charge sheet has been filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba in Criminal Case No. 805/2008. The applicant applied for interim custody of the articles under S.451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which has been rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba. Against the said order of the Magistrate, revision was preferred before the Sessions Judge, Korba which was also dismissed by the order impugned.

5. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the owner of the valuable articles as well as the currency notes taken away by the dacoits from his house. It is further submitted that since the said articles are lying unused there may be every likelihood of their misappropriation and the applicant is also not able to use the same. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish the security bonds for the production of the articles before the Court whenever directed to do so by the Court. It is submitted that the articles belonging to the applicant cannot be retained by the police or the Court. It is submitted that a detailed Panchnama may be prepared which may be used in evidence to establish the factum of dacoity of the alleged articles. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat , 2003 KHC 535 : 2002 AIR SCW 5301 : AIR 2003 SC 638 : 2003 (2) KLT 1089 : 2002 (10) SCC 283 in which it has been held that the powers under S.451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. Court is required to pass appropriate orders immediately and articles are not to be kept for a long time at Police Station, in any case for not more than fifteen days to one month. The relevant portion of the order reads thus:
'7. In our view, the powers under S.451, CrPC should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely: --
1. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation;
2. Court or the police would not be required to keep the articles in safe custody;
3. If the proper panchnama before handing over possession of article is prepared that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of the property in detail; and
4. This jurisdiction of the Court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles.'

6. Counsel for the respondent / State submits that it is a serious case of dacoity committed in the house of the present applicant. Currency notes and other valu