Bombay High Court
Nanasaheb Ramnath Nirmal vs State Of Maharashtra on 9 November, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
1 APEAL155.2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 155 OF 2003
Nanasaheb S/o Ramnath Nirmal,
Age : 30 years, Occu. Service,
R/o. Nirmal Pimpri, Tq. Rahata,
Dist. Ahmednagar. ... Appellant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
..........
Mr Uday S. Malte, Advocate for the appellant
Mr S. J. Salgare, APP for respondent/State
.............
CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE &
A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.
DATE : 09.11.2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.M. DHAVALE, J.) :
. This is an appeal by the original informant challenging the
order of crediting money seized to the Government. The appeal is
filed u/s 454 of the Cr.P.C.
2. In Sessions Case No. 18/2000, eight accused persons were
charged for committing dacoity and robbing PW1 Nanasaheb
Nirmal/the appellant of cash of Rs. 27,468/- + 450/- and other
articles namely diary, bills, receipt books of the informant.
::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/11/2017 00:53:44 :::
2 APEAL155.2003
3. During the investigation, the accused were arrested. The
following amounts were seized from them.
Sr. Accused No. & Name Amount seized in rupees
No.
[1] Accused No. 1 - Mallu 1570/- + diary with photographs of the
informant (Panchanama Exh. 80).
[2] Accused No. 2 - Popat Cash of Rs. 4650/-(Panchanama Exh.99)
[3] Accused No. 3 - Sanjay Cash of Rs.4050/- (Panchanama Exh. 83).
[4] Accused No. 4 - Rajendra Cash of Rs.2450/- (Panchanama Exh103).
[5] Accused No. 5 - Sattar Cash of Rs. 3000/- (Panchanama Exh102)
[6] Accused No. 6 - Kiran --
[7] Accused No. 7 - Sameer 3200/-
[8] Accused No. 8 - Baba 3200/-
Total Rs. 22,120/-
4. The prosecution led evidence and PW1 Nanasaheb, who
has deposed that on 27.06.2000 at about 05:00 a.m. while he was
returning by his Tempo from Kopargaon to Sangamner, at Sahakar
Nagar his tempo was halted and he was assaulted by four persons
and threatened to be killed. Then they drove the Tempo upto
Pultamba diversion. They robbed the informant of Rs. 27,468/- and
cash of Rs. 450/- from his own pocket. One diary and bills were also
taken away with the cash. He identified the diary and bills and
receipts recovered along with the cash. Since the cash was not
having any identification marks, it could not be identified. The ld.
Addl. Sessions Judge, Kopargaon acquitted the accused on the
::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/11/2017 00:53:44 :::
3 APEAL155.2003
ground of absence of identification parade. For want of identification
of the cash, he directed that the cash be forfeited to the State.
5. It is relevant here to record that, all the accused have
denied the seizure of cash from them and thus they have not claimed
the cash. This order of forfeiture of cash is under challenge.
6. Learned advocate Mr U. S. Malte for the appellant argued
that, when the accused were not claiming the cash, it should have
been given to the informant.
7. Learned APP Mr Salgare argued that, the cash was not
identified as stolen property and, therefore, it was forfeited to the
State.
8. When the accused have disclaimed the money, the seized
cash should have been handed over to the informant who was
claiming the money. The forfeiture of the property to the State was
wholly unjustified and unwanted.
9. In this regard, we rely on Mahesh Kumar Vs State of
Rajasthan 1991 SC (Cri) 219 wherein, in the similar facts and
::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/11/2017 00:53:44 :::
4 APEAL155.2003
circumstances it is observed thus:
"In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are
satisfied that the direction made by the learned Single
Judge of the Rajasthan High Court for the forfeiture of
the amount of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand)
to the State is wholly unwarranted. It is now accepted
principle that the confessional part of the statement
made by the accused leading to discovery within the
meaning of Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 or
Section 162 of he Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
can be made use of for the purpose of and the disposal
of the property under Section 452 of the Code. The
High Court as well as the courts below found the
property to be the subject of theft and the acquittal of
the accused is upon benefit of doubt. The accused
disclaimed the stolen property and there is no reason
why same should not be returned to the owner-the
complainant, to which it belongs".
8. Thus, the appeal deserves to be allowed. Hence, the order.
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The order of ld. Additional Sessions Judge,
Kopargaon in Sessions Case No. 18/2000 decided
on 04.01.2003 to the extent of forfeiture of cash
amount to the State is set aside. It is ordered that,
5 APEAL155.2003
the cash of Rs. 22,120/- seized shall be delivered to
the informant subject to furnishing Indemnity Bond
to the satisfaction of the trial Judge. There shall be
no order as to costs.
[ A. M. DHAVALE ] [ T. V. NALAWADE ]
JUDGE JUDGE
sgp
