Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SHYAMAL MITRA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
SLP(Crl) No.-006674 / 2021
13-09-2021
KAUSHIK CHOUDHURY
ITEM NO.17 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6674/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-07-2021
in CRLP No. 478/2020 passed by the Gauhati High Court)
SHYAMAL MITRA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.110915/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.110917/2021-EXEMPTION FROM
FILING O.T. )
Date : 13-09-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2.
On or about 16th June, 2020, the Respondent No.2 lodged an FIR
before the Changsari Police Station stating that the Respondent
No.2 had loaded a truck bearing Registration No.AP 39 U 6219 with
dried Areca Nut (supari) from their warehouse situated at
Brahmaputra Industrial Park, Gauripur on 13th June, 2020, but the
vehicle was not traceable and the mobile phones of the driver and
the helper of the said truck were switched off.
Digitally signed by
SUNIL KUMAR
Date: 2021.09.22
16:29:05 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
2
3. On or about 13th July, 2020, police personnel from the Changsari
Police Station visited the godown of the Petitioner located at his
residence and seized two Bolero Pick-up vans bearing Registration
No. AS 18 C 9029 and AS 25 CC 7192. Each of the vehicles was
loaded with 60 bags of dried Areca Nuts. Another lot of 234 bags
of dried Areca Nuts each bag weighing approximately 50/52 kgs were
seized from the godown of the Petitioner.
4.
On 28th July, 2020, the Petitioner filed an application under
Section 451/457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being Zimma
Petition No. 567/2020 praying for the custody of these 354 bags of
Areca Nuts. On or about 3rd August, 2020, the Respondent No.2 filed
Petition No. 980/2020 taking its objection to the Zimma Petition
No.567/2020. The Respondent No.2 also filed an application under
Section 451/457 of the Cr.P.C. being Zimma Petition No. 1067/2020
on or about 7th August, 2020, praying for custody of the said bags
of Areca Nuts.
5.
On 14th August, 2020, the Petitioner submitted a petition being
Petition No. 991/2020 before the Trial Court praying for directions
on the Respondent No.2 to supply copies of objection Petition
No.980/2020 and the Zimma Petition No. 1067/2020 filed on 3rd
August, 2020 and 7th August, 2020 along with supporting documents.
6.
The Trial Court permitted the Respondent No.2 to file second
objection. Being purportedly aggrieved by the filing of the
subsequent objection, the petitioner filed a petition No.1000/2020
3
challenging the maintainability of the second Objection Petition
No.997/2020.
7.
On or about 4th September, 2020, the Respondent No.2 replied to
the said Petition No. 1000/2020 stating that on 3rd August, 2020,
when he filed his first objection, he did not have any copy of the
Zimma Petition No.567 of 2020. The second objection petition was
prepared after receipt of a copy of the Zimma Petition and was
filed on 20th August, 2020.
8.
By an order dated 17th September, 2020, the Trial Court held
that the second objection petition was maintainable. The learned
Trial Court noted that the petitioner had received documents after
4th August, 2020 and hence had to file a second objection. The
Court found that there is no bar in law in filing second or
subsequent objection to any petition. There was no patent error in
the order.
9.
Being aggrieved by the
