TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1977 (4) TMI 170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssession of the complainant/appellant. On February 8. 1959 a number of stolen articles were recovered from accused Nos. 1 to 5 and various panchnamas evidencing recovery of those articles were prepared. On February 10. 1959 the articles seized by the police from the possession of the accused were identified by the complainant at a test identification parade and ultimately a charge-sheet was submitted against the five accused on February 20. 1959. The articles were produced before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate who directed the police officer concerned to retain the articles in his custody until the same were verified and their value was determined by a goldsmith. The Court moved the higher authorities for obtaining sanction of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Magistrate and an unsuccessful appeal to the Sessions Judge. Dharwar. The High Court in revision, however acquitted the accused on technical grounds. After the conclusion of the trial the complainant filed an application before the trial Magistrate for return of the stolen articles or in absence of the same for payment of the equivalent value thereof. This application was rejected by the Magistrate on the ground that as the articles never reached the custody of the Court, the complainant was not entitled to their restoration. The complainant then filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Dharwar, which also met with a similar fate. Thereafter the complainant went up in revision to the High Court of Mysore which was also dismissed by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to retain it ceases. It is manifest that there may be two stages when the property may be returned to the owner. In the first place it may be returned during any inquiry or trial. This may particularly be necessary where the property concerned is subject to speedy or natural decay. There may be other compelling reasons also which may justify the disposal of the property to the owner or otherwise in the interest of justice. The High Court and the Sessions Judge proceeded on the footing that one of the essential requirements of the Code is that the articles concerned must be produced before the Court or should be in its custody. The object of the Code seems to be that any property which is in the control of the Court either directly or indire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court by passing an order regarding the custody of the articles. In the instant case when once the Magistrate, after having been informed that the articles were produced before the Court, directed the Sub-Inspector to keep them with him in safe custody, to get them verified and valued by a goldsmith, the articles were undoubtedly produced before the Court and became custodialegis. 6. It is common ground that these articles belonged to the complainant/ appellant and had been stolen from her house. It is, therefore, clear that the articles were the subject-matter of an offence. This fact therefore, is sufficient to clothe the Magistrate with the power to pass an order for return of the property. Where the property is stolen, lost or destro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 10,050/-. This will appear from Ext. 34 which gives a detailed and exhaustive list of the articles kept in the trunk and the value thereof. In these circumstances, therefore, it can be safely held that the value of the property recovered from the possession of the five accused and stolen from the house of the complainant was Rs. 10,000/-. It is also clear that in the instant case, no plea had been taken by the State that the property was lost in spite of due care and caution having been taken by it or due to circumstances beyond its control. On the other hand, while all the articles were stolen from the trunk kept in the Guard Room of the police station, except the formality of a report having been lodged, no action seems to have been ....