Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022
M/s.Fedbank Financial Services Ltd.,
Plot No.7, Ground Floor, Raazak Garden Main Road,
Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106,
Rep.by Mr.M.Jayabal. ...Petitioner
..vs..
State Represented by
The Inspector of Police,
K-8, Arumbakkam Police Station,
Chennai. ... Respondent
Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C
to set aside the order passed by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate
Court, Egmore in Crl.M.P.No.27771 of 2022 dated 14.09.2022 and allow
this Revision.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari
for Mr.V.Balasubramani
For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran
Additional Public Prosecutor
Page No.1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022
ORDER
This revision has been preferred challenging the order dated 14.09.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.27771 of 2022 by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 13.08.2022 one Murugan, who was working as Relationship Executive of the petitioner/Bank had accompanied two unknown persons and came to the petitioner/Bank and threatened the employees with dire consequences and forcibly collected the locker key and opened the same at knife point and robbed 460 packets totally weighing 31.700 kgs of gold jewels, worth about Rs.11 crores which were mortgaged by 371 customers of the financial institution. Hence, one Suresh, Branch Manager of the petitioner/Bank lodged a complaint against the said Murugan and two others before respondent/Police.
3.The respondent/Police registered a case in Crime No.297 of Page No.2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 2022 against the accused for the offences under Sections 342, 397 IPC r/w 120-B IPC altered to Sections 342, 395, 397, 412 and 414 IPC. During the investigation the respondent/Police recovered the jewels from the accused. The accused persons were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The seized jewels were kept in the safe custody of the respondent/Police as per the instructions of the Court below. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 457 Cr.P.C before the V Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.27771 of 2022 for passing an order to return of the jewels recovered by the respondents and the same was dismissed by the Court below. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the present revision case.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner has made out the case under Section 457 Cr.P.C, however the Court below has failed to consider the same and dismissed the petition. He further submitted that the respondent/ Police have already filed Form Page No.3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 95 petition regarding the property recovered by them and also filed a reply stating that they have no objection to grant interim custody to the petitioner/ de-facto complainant, however, the Court below dismissed the petition on 14.09.2022 on the ground that the petitioner has no locus- standi to file this petition. The Court below failed to note that the petitioner has already filed the authorization letter, whereby they authorized their representative duly to deal with the case in favour of the petitioner.
5.When the matter was taken up for hearing on 21.09.2022, this Court directed the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent to get instructions and also file a status report.
6.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/Police filed a status report and on instructions he submitted that during the investigation the Investigating Officer recovered the jewels and out of Page No.4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 eight accused, seven accused have already been arrested and one accused is yet to be arrested. Except these facts, the investigating agency has no objection to grant interim custody to the petitioner.
7. In similar circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC, 283 has held as follows :
''Valuable articles and currency notes Valuable articles such as golden or silver ornaments or articles studded with precious stones, need not be kept in police custody for years till trial is over. The Magistrate should pass appropriate orders as contemplated under Section 451 Cr.P.C at the earliest. For this purpose, if material on record indicates that such articles belong to the complainant at whose house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, then seized articles be handed over to the complainant after (1) preparing detailed proper panchanama of such articles;
(2) taking photographs of such articles and a bond that such articles would be produced if required at the Page No.5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 time of trial; and (3) after taking proper security.
For this purpose, the court may follow the procedure of recording such evidence, as it thinks necessary,as provided under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The bond and security should be taken so as to prevent the evidence being lost, altered or destroyed. The Court should see that photographs of such articles are attested or countersigned by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Still however, it would be the function of the Court under Section 451 Cr.PC to impose any other appropriate condition.''
8.The Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (referred to supra) had given a direction that when the property was recovered from the accused, as there is no dispute with reference to the identity of the owner ship, the Court can return the property after getting suitable security and also get a photo copy of the same, if necessary. At the time of trial, the same should be produced Page No.6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 before the Court, in case a question arises regarding the identity of the property.
9. In the case on hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has produced all necessary documents before the Court below, however, the learned Magistrate failed to look into the same and dismissed the petition stating that there is no iota of documents to show that the petitioner is working in the petitioner/Bank and Bank has given authorization letter to the petitioner for filing the petition to get back the properties, which were recovered by the respondent/Police and came to the conclusion that the petitioner has no locus-standi to file this petition. Whatever be the documents that are required by the Court below, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is seen that the petitioner has filed authorisation letter, which is also annexed at page no.2 of the typed set of papers filed by the petitioner before this Court.
10.On a combined reading of the entire materials, it is seen that Page No.7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 based on the complaint given by the de-facto complainant, all the properties mentioned in petition were recovered by the respondent/Police during the investigation. Therefore, the ownership is not in dispute and the identification is also not in dispute and hence, the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai is directed to hand over the properties to the petitioner, after obtaining the identity card and security from the Bank for the value of the property. Further, the petitioner is directed to produce the properties if necessary either for investigation or trial, as and when required.
11.With the above observations, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order dated 14.09.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.27771 of 2022 by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai is set aside.
23.09.2022 Note: Issue order copy on 26.09.2022 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order ms Page No.8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 To
1.The V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.
2.The Inspector of Police, K-8, Arumbakkam Police Station, Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page No.9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 P.VELMURUGAN, J.
ms Crl.R.C.No.1349 of 2022 23.09.2022 Page No.10/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis